General Schedule Locality Pay Areas, 30955-30959 [2015-13135]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
30955
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 80, No. 104
Monday, June 1, 2015
5 CFR Part 531
in these 13 locations was substantially
greater than the ‘‘Rest of U.S.’’ pay
disparity over an extended period. The
President’s Pay Agent has agreed to
issue proposed regulations in response
to the Federal Salary Council’s
recommendation to establish the 13 new
locality pay areas. Locality pay rates for
the new locality pay areas would be set
by the President after the new locality
pay areas would be established by
regulation.
RIN 3206–AM88
DATES:
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
General Schedule Locality Pay Areas
U.S. Office of Personnel
Management.
ACTION: Proposed rule with request for
comments.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Office of Personnel
Management is issuing proposed
regulations on behalf of the President’s
Pay Agent to link the definitions of
General Schedule (GS) locality pay area
boundaries to updated metropolitan
area definitions established by the
Office of Management and Budget in
February 2013. Under this proposal,
locations that would otherwise move to
a lower-paying locality pay area due to
use of the updated metropolitan area
definitions in the locality pay program
would remain in their current locality
pay area. This proposal does not modify
the current commuting and GS
employment criteria used in the locality
pay program to evaluate, for possible
inclusion in a locality pay area,
locations adjacent to the metropolitan
area comprising the basic locality pay
area. However, regarding calculation of
commuting interchange rates used to
evaluate such locations, the locality pay
area definitions proposed in this
document reflect use of the commuting
patterns data collected as part of the
American Community Survey between
2006 and 2010, as recommended by the
Federal Salary Council in January 2014.
Under this proposal, 13 new locality
pay areas would also be established.
The Federal Salary Council
recommended these 13 locality pay
areas after reviewing pay levels in all
‘‘Rest of U.S.’’ metropolitan statistical
areas and combined statistical areas
with 2,500 or more GS employees. The
Federal Salary Council found that the
percentage difference between GS and
non-Federal pay levels for the same
levels of work—i.e., the pay disparity—
rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:29 May 29, 2015
Jkt 235001
We must receive comments on or
before July 1, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by ‘‘RIN 3206–AM88,’’ by any
of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Email: pay-leave-policy@opm.gov.
Include ‘‘RIN 3206–AM88’’ in the
subject line of the message.
Fax: (202) 606–0824.
Mail: Brenda L. Roberts, Deputy
Associate Director for Pay and Leave,
Office of Personnel Management, Room
7H31, 1900 E Street NW., Washington,
DC 20415–8200.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe
Ratcliffe, (202) 606–2838; fax: (202)
606–0824; email: pay-leave-policy@
opm.gov.
Section
5304 of title 5, United States Code
(U.S.C.), authorizes locality pay for
General Schedule (GS) employees with
duty stations in the United States and
its territories and possessions. Section
5304(f) of title 5 U.S.C. 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 Pay Agent on
the locality pay program. The
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
establishment or modification of locality
pay area boundaries must conform with
the notice and comment provisions of
the Administrative Procedure Act (5
U.S.C. 553).
This proposal provides notice and
invites comment on proposed
regulations to implement the Pay
Agent’s plan to link locality pay area
definitions to OMB-defined
metropolitan areas, to use new
commuting patterns data for evaluating
locations adjacent to the metropolitan
area comprising the basic locality pay
area, and to establish 13 new locality
pay areas. (Annual Pay Agent reports on
locality pay can be found posted on the
OPM Web site at https://www.opm.gov/
policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/paysystems/general-schedule/#url=PayAgent-Reports. The Pay Agent
announced its plan to propose
regulations linking locality pay area
boundaries to OMB-defined
metropolitan areas and using new
commuting patterns data in its June
2014 report on locality pay. The Pay
Agent announced its plan to establish
12 of the 13 new locality pay areas in
its May 2013 report on locality pay. The
Federal Salary Council, in its November
2014 recommendations, recommended
establishing Kansas City, MO–KS, as a
new locality pay area. Because the
Federal Salary Council used the same
selection criteria as used for the 12 new
locality pay areas the Pay Agent
tentatively approved, the Pay Agent
proposes establishing Kansas City, MO–
KS as a new locality pay area.)
Linking Locality Pay Area Boundaries
to OMB-Defined Metropolitan Areas
OMB-defined metropolitan areas have
been the basis of locality pay area
boundaries since locality pay was
implemented in 1994. OMB periodically
updates its definitions of metropolitan
areas, and regulations defining locality
pay areas normally allow any minor
changes in OMB-defined metropolitan
areas to be reflected in locality pay area
definitions automatically. However,
because we anticipated significant
changes to metropolitan area definitions
in 2013, in January 2013, we revised the
regulations defining locality pay areas
so that updates based on OMB’s
redefinitions would not automatically
be reflected in locality pay area
definitions. (See Federal Register Vol.
78, No. 16, page 5115, January 24, 2013,
E:\FR\FM\01JNP1.SGM
01JNP1
rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
30956
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 104 / Monday, June 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules
and the current definitions of ‘‘CSA’’
and ‘‘MSA’’ in 5 CFR 531.602.) That
action provided time for the Federal
Salary Council and the Pay Agent to
review the updated metropolitan area
definitions for suitability for use in the
locality pay program. As a result,
locality pay area definitions were frozen
and are currently based on December
2009 OMB-defined metropolitan areas.
In February 2013, OMB issued new
metropolitan area definitions, and in its
January 2014 recommendations to the
Pay Agent, the Federal Salary Council
recommended that the Pay Agent use
the February 2013 metropolitan area
definitions in the locality pay program.
The Pay Agent, in its June 2014 report
to the President on locality pay,
tentatively approved that
recommendation, pending the issuance
of revised locality pay regulations. This
proposed rule would implement the
change by revising the definitions of
‘‘CSA’’ and ‘‘MSA’’ in 5 CFR 531.602, to
link the definitions of locality pay areas
to the February 2013 OMB-defined
metropolitan areas, and by updating the
locality pay area definitions in 5 CFR
531.603 accordingly. The proposed
revisions to the definitions of ‘‘CSA’’
and ‘‘MSA’’ in 5 CFR 531.602 would
provide that any OMB additions to the
CSAs and MSAs comprising basic
locality pay areas would be reflected in
locality pay area definitions
automatically. The proposed rule also
implements the Pay Agent’s plan to
retain, in their current locality pay area,
any locations that would otherwise
move to a lower-paying locality pay area
as a result of linking locality pay area
definitions to the February 2013 OMBdefined metropolitan areas, as
recommended by the Federal Salary
Council. Under this proposed rule, any
such retained area would no longer be
part of the basic locality pay area due to
use of the February 2013 OMB-defined
metropolitan areas and would be treated
as an area of application.
OMB-defined metropolitan areas are
called Core-Based Statistical Areas
(CBSAs) and are grouped into three
categories: Micropolitan Statistical
Areas, where the largest included urban
area has a population of 10,000 to
49,999; Metropolitan Statistical Areas
(MSAs), where the largest included
urban area has a population of 50,000 or
more; and Combined Statistical Areas
(CSAs), which are composed of two or
more adjacent CBSAs with an
employment interchange measure of at
least 15 percent. (The employment
interchange measure is the sum of the
percentage of workers living in the
smaller entity who work in the larger
entity and the percentage of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:29 May 29, 2015
Jkt 235001
employment in the smaller entity that is
accounted for by workers who reside in
the larger entity.) CBSA definitions used
for the locality pay program under this
proposal are contained in OMB Bulletin
13–01 of February 28, 2013, and are
available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/
sites/default/files/omb/bulletins/2013/b13-01.pdf.
Criteria for Areas of Application
As explained in the June 2014 Pay
Agent report, locality pay areas consist
of 1) the main metropolitan area
comprising the basic locality pay area
and, where criteria recommended by the
Federal Salary Council and approved by
the Pay Agent are met, 2) areas of
application. Areas of application are
locations that are adjacent to the basic
locality pay area and meet approved
criteria for inclusion in the locality pay
area.
Current criteria for evaluating
locations adjacent to a basic locality pay
area for possible inclusion in the
locality pay area as areas of application
are as follows: For adjacent CSAs and
adjacent multi-county MSAs the criteria
are 1,500 or more GS employees and a
commuting interchange rate of at least
7.5 percent. For adjacent single
counties, the criteria are 400 or more GS
employees and a commuting
interchange rate of at least 7.5 percent.
The commuting interchange rate is
defined as the sum of the percentage of
employed residents of the area under
consideration who work in the basic
locality pay area and the percentage of
the employment in the area under
consideration that is accounted for by
workers who reside in the basic locality
pay area.
The locality pay program also has
criteria for evaluating Federal facilities
that cross county lines into a separate
locality pay area. 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.
New Commuting Patterns Data
As stated in the June 2014 Pay Agent
report, new commuting patterns data
were collected as part of the American
Community Survey from 2006 to 2010,
and the Federal Salary Council
recommended, in its January 2014
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
recommendations, using those data for
evaluating potential areas of
application. The Pay Agent tentatively
agreed in its June 2014 report that it
would be appropriate to use the new
commuting patterns data for evaluating
potential areas of application, and the
areas of application included in the
locality pay area definitions in this
proposed rule, at 5 CFR 531.603(b),
reflect use of the new commuting
patterns data for that purpose.
Locations Almost or Completely
Surrounded by Higher-Paying Locality
Pay Areas
In its November 2012
recommendations, the Federal Salary
Council noted that, if its
recommendations for changing pay area
boundaries were adopted, some areas
currently in the ‘‘Rest of U.S.’’ locality
pay area and not meeting the criteria for
areas of application would be almost or
completely surrounded by higherpaying locality pay areas. The Federal
Salary Council recommended that
completely surrounded locations be
added to the locality pay area with
which the surrounded location has the
highest level of commuting to and from
the basic locality pay area. For locations
almost but not completely surrounded
by higher-paying locality pay areas, the
Federal Salary Council recommended
that the Pay Agent evaluate, on a caseby-case basis, any locations almost but
not completely surrounded by separate
pay areas. The Federal Salary Council
reiterated those recommendations in its
January 2014 recommendations.
Without criteria to address locations
completely surrounded by higherpaying locality pay areas, this proposal’s
changes to locality pay area boundaries
would leave Kent County, MD, and
Lancaster County, PA, in the ‘‘Rest of
U.S.’’ locality pay area, and both
counties could also be completely
surrounded by higher-paying locality
pay areas. The Pay Agent believes that
single-county locations completely
surrounded by higher-paying locality
pay areas should be included in the
locality pay area with the highest
commuting interchange rate between
the surrounded county and the basic
locality pay area. Accordingly, this
proposed rule would amend the locality
pay area definitions at 5 CFR 531.603(b)
to include Kent County, MD, in the
Washington-Baltimore-Arlington, DC–
MD–VA–WV–PA locality pay area and
Lancaster County, PA, in the HarrisburgYork-Lebanon, PA, locality pay area.
The issue of how to address ‘‘Rest of
U.S.’’ locations that are almost but not
completely surrounded by higherpaying locality pay areas requires
E:\FR\FM\01JNP1.SGM
01JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 104 / Monday, June 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules
careful consideration. The Pay Agent’s
preliminary view is that partially
surrounded locations warranting some
action would most likely be single ‘‘Rest
of U.S.’’ counties—not multi-county
metropolitan areas or large groups of
counties—that are bordered by multiple
higher-paying locality pay areas or are
surrounded by water and isolated as
‘‘Rest of U.S.’’ locations within a
reasonable commuting distance of a
higher-paying locality pay area. The Pay
Agent believes any such ‘‘Rest of U.S.’’
locations considered for inclusion in a
separate locality pay area should be
evaluated with criteria designed to
evaluate such locations. The Pay Agent
invites public comment on this issue.
Houston-The Woodlands, TX
Trinity County, TX; Washington
County, TX; and Wharton County, TX.
Huntsville-Decatur-Albertville, AL
Marshall County, AL.
Indianapolis-Carmel-Muncie, IN
Decatur County, IN; Delaware County,
IN; and Jackson County, IN.
Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA
All portions of Kern County, CA,
currently included in the ‘‘Rest of U.S.’’
locality pay area.
Effect of Changes to Locality Pay Area
Boundaries
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Port St. Lucie,
FL
Indian River County, FL; Martin
County, FL; Okeechobee County, FL;
and St. Lucie County, FL.
This proposal would amend 5 CFR
531.603(b) to add the following
locations to existing locality pay areas:
Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha, WI
Dodge County, WI; Jefferson County,
WI; and Walworth County, WI.
Atlanta—Athens-Clarke County—Sandy
Springs, GA
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI
Le Sueur County, MN; Mille Lacs
County, MN; and Sibley County, MN.
Clarke County, GA; Gordon County,
GA; Jackson County, GA; Madison
County, GA; Morgan County, GA;
Oconee County, GA; and Oglethorpe
County, GA.
New York-Newark, NY-NJ-CT-PA
Carbon County, PA; Lehigh County,
PA; and Northampton County, PA.
Pittsburgh-New Castle-Weirton, PA-OHWV
Jefferson County, OH; Indiana County,
PA; Brooke County, WV; and Hancock
County, WV.
Boston-Worcester-Providence, MA-RINH-CT-ME
Androscoggin County, ME;
Cumberland County, ME; Sagadahoc
County, ME; and all portions of York
County, ME, that are currently in the
‘‘Rest of U.S.’’ locality pay area.
Portland-Vancouver-Salem, OR-WA
Benton County, OR; Linn County, OR;
and Cowlitz County, WA.
Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI
Bureau County, IL; LaSalle County,
IL; and Putnam County, IL.
Cincinnati-Wilmington-Maysville, OHKY-IN
Mason County, KY, and Union
County, IN.
Seattle-Tacoma, WA
Lewis County, WA.
Cleveland-Akron-Canton, OH
Carroll County, OH; Erie County, OH;
Huron County, OH; Stark County, OH;
and Tuscarawas County, OH.
rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Columbus-Marion-Zanesville, OH
Guernsey County, OH; Hocking
County, OH; Logan County, OH;
Muskingum County, OH; and Perry
County, OH.
Dallas-Fort Worth, TX–OK
Bryan County, OK; Hopkins County,
TX; and Navarro County, TX.
Dayton-Springfield-Sidney, OH
Shelby County, OH.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:29 May 29, 2015
Jkt 235001
Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, NC
Lee County, NC; Robeson County, NC;
Scotland County, NC; Vance County,
NC; and all portions of Granville
County, NC, currently included in the
‘‘Rest of U.S.’’ locality pay area.
Washington-Baltimore-Arlington, DCMD-VA-WV-PA
Dorchester County, MD; Kent County,
MD; Talbot County, MD; Franklin
County, PA; and Rappahannock County,
VA.
Establishing 13 New Locality Pay Areas
Locality pay is set by comparing GS
and non-Federal pay rates for the same
levels of work in each locality pay area.
Non-Federal salary survey data used to
set locality pay rates are collected by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Over
the last several years, BLS has
developed a method that permits
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30957
Occupational Employment Statistics
(OES) data to be used for locality pay.
OES data are available for all MSAs and
CSAs in the country and permit
evaluation of salary levels in many more
locations than could be covered under
the prior National Compensation Survey
alone.
The Federal Salary Council reviewed
pay comparisons of GS and non-Federal
pay in all ‘‘Rest of U.S.’’ MSAs and
CSAs with 2,500 or more GS employees
as of June 2011. Based on its review, the
Federal Salary Council recommended
new locality pay areas be established for
12 metropolitan areas with pay gaps
averaging more than 10 percentage
points above that for the ‘‘Rest of U.S.’’
locality pay area over an extended
period. The Federal Salary Council’s
recommendations are posted on the
OPM Web site at https://www.opm.gov/
policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/paysystems/general-schedule/federalsalary-council/recommendation12.pdf.
In its November 2014 recommendations,
using the same selection methodology,
the Federal Salary Council
recommended that Kansas City, MO–
KS, also be established as a separate
locality pay area.
The President’s Pay Agent has agreed
to issue proposed regulations in
response to the Federal Salary Council’s
recommendation to establish 13 new
locality pay areas and proposes to
modify 5 CFR 531.603(b) to add the new
locality pay areas. The 13 new locality
pay areas proposed are AlbanySchenectady, NY; Albuquerque-Santa
Fe-Las Vegas, NM; Austin-Round Rock,
TX; Charlotte-Concord, NC–SC;
Colorado Springs, CO; DavenportMoline, IA–IL; Harrisburg-YorkLebanon, PA; Laredo, TX; Kansas CityOverland Park-Kansas City, MO–KS; Las
Vegas-Henderson, NV–AZ; Palm BayMelbourne-Titusville, FL; St. Louis-St.
Charles-Farmington, MO–IL; and
Tucson-Nogales, AZ. Locality pay rates
for the 13 new locality pay areas would
be set by the President at a later date
after they would be established by
regulation.
Adjacent Areas Qualifying as Areas of
Application to New Locality Pay Areas
Applying the criteria explained above
for evaluating locations adjacent to basic
locality pay areas as areas of
application, this proposed rule would
add the following counties to the new
locality pay areas at 5 CFR 531.603(b):
Fremont County, CO, and Pueblo
County, CO, to the Colorado Springs,
CO, locality pay area; Lancaster County,
PA, to the Harrisburg-York-Lebanon,
PA, locality pay area; Jackson County,
KS, Jefferson County, KS, Osage County,
E:\FR\FM\01JNP1.SGM
01JNP1
30958
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 104 / Monday, June 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules
KS, Shawnee County, KS, and
Wabaunsee County, KS to the Kansas
City-Overland Park-Kansas City, MO–
KS, locality pay area; and Cochise
County, AZ, to the Tucson-Nogales, AZ,
locality pay area.
Regarding the criteria explained above
for evaluating Federal facilities that
cross locality pay area boundaries, the
Pay Agent is not aware of any Federal
facilities that qualify for inclusion in the
new locality pay areas under these
criteria.
Impact and Implementation
Using February 2013 CBSA
definitions as the basis for locality pay
area boundaries and using updated
commuting patterns data to evaluate
potential areas of application would add
a number of counties now covered by
‘‘Rest of U.S.’’ locality pay to higherpaying locality pay areas, which would
impact about 6,300 GS employees.
The proposal to establish 13 new
locality pay areas would impact about
102,000 GS employees. Implementing
that proposal would not automatically
change locality pay rates now applicable
in those areas because locality pay
percentages are established by Executive
order under the President’s authority in
5 U.S.C. 5304 or 5304a, and the
President decides each year whether to
increase locality pay percentages. When
locality pay percentages are increased,
past practice has been to allocate a
percent of the total GS payroll for
locality raises and to have the overall
dollar cost for such pay raises be the
same, regardless of the number of
locality pay areas. If a percent of the
total GS payroll is allocated for locality
pay increases, the addition of new areas
results in a smaller amount to allocate
for locality pay increases in existing
areas. Implementing higher locality pay
rates in the 13 new locality pay areas
could thus result in relatively lower pay
increases for employees in existing
locality pay areas than they would
otherwise receive.
rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Executive Order 13563 and Executive
Order 12866
OMB has reviewed this rule in
accordance with E.O. 13563 and 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:29 May 29, 2015
Jkt 235001
Office of Personnel Management.
Katherine Archuleta,
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), 5305, 5333, 5334(a) and (b), and
7701(b)(2); Subpart D also issued under 5
U.S.C. 5335 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, and
5941(a), 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 F—Locality-Based
Comparability Payments
2. In § 531.602, the definitions of CSA
and MSA are revised to read as follows:
■
§ 531.602
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
CSA means the geographic scope of a
Combined Statistical Area, as defined by
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) in OMB Bulletin No. 13–01, plus
any areas subsequently added to the
CSA by OMB.
*
*
*
*
*
MSA means the geographic scope of a
Metropolitan Statistical Area, as defined
by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) in OMB Bulletin No. 13–
01, plus any areas subsequently added
to the MSA by OMB.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. In § 531.603, paragraph (b) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 531.603
Locality pay areas.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) The following are locality pay
areas for the purposes of this subpart:
(1) Alaska—consisting of the State of
Alaska;
(2) Albany-Schenectady, NY—
consisting of the Albany-Schenectady,
NY CSA;
(3) Albuquerque-Santa Fe-Las Vegas,
NM—consisting of the AlbuquerqueSanta Fe-Las Vegas, NM CSA;
(4) Atlanta—Athens-Clarke County—
Sandy Springs, GA–AL—consisting of
the Atlanta—Athens-Clarke County—
Sandy Springs, GA CSA and also
including Chambers County, AL;
(5) Austin-Round Rock, TX—
consisting of the Austin-Round Rock,
TX MSA;
(6) Boston-Worcester-Providence,
MA–RI–NH–CT–ME—consisting of the
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Boston-Worcester-Providence, MA–RI–
NH–CT CSA, except for Windham
County, CT, and also including
Androscoggin County, ME, Cumberland
County, ME, Sagadahoc County, ME,
and York County, ME;
(7) Buffalo-Cheektowaga, NY—
consisting of the Buffalo-Cheektowaga,
NY CSA;
(8) Charlotte-Concord, NC-SC—
consisting of the Charlotte-Concord,
NC–SC CSA;
(9) Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN–WI—
consisting of the Chicago-Naperville,
IL–IN–WI CSA;
(10) Cincinnati-WilmingtonMaysville, OH-KY–IN—consisting of the
Cincinnati-Wilmington-Maysville, OH–
KY–IN CSA and also including Franklin
County, IN;
(11) Cleveland-Akron-Canton, OH—
consisting of the Cleveland-AkronCanton, OH CSA;
(12) Colorado Springs, CO—consisting
of the Colorado Springs, CO MSA and
also including Fremont County, CO, and
Pueblo County, CO;
(13) Columbus-Marion-Zanesville,
OH—consisting of the ColumbusMarion-Zanesville, OH CSA;
(14) Dallas-Fort Worth, TX-OK—
consisting of the Dallas-Fort Worth, TX–
OK CSA and also including Delta
County, TX, and Fannin County, TX;
(15) Davenport-Moline, IA-IL—
consisting of the Davenport-Moline, IA–
IL CSA;
(16) Dayton-Springfield-Sidney, OH—
consisting of the Dayton-SpringfieldSidney, OH CSA and also including
Preble County, OH;
(17) Denver-Aurora, CO—consisting
of the Denver-Aurora, CO CSA and also
including Larimer County, CO;
(18) Detroit-Warren-Ann Arbor, MI—
consisting of the Detroit-Warren-Ann
Arbor, MI CSA;
(19) Harrisburg-York-Lebanon, PA—
consisting of the Harrisburg-YorkLebanon, PA CSA, except for and
Adams County, PA, and York County,
PA, and also including Lancaster
County, PA;
(20) Hartford-West Hartford, CT–
MA—consisting of the Hartford-West
Hartford, CT CSA and also including
Windham County, CT, Franklin County,
MA, Hampden County, MA, and
Hampshire County, MA;
(21) Hawaii—consisting of the State of
Hawaii;
(22) Houston-The Woodlands, TX—
consisting of the Houston-The
Woodlands, TX CSA and also including
San Jacinto County, TX;
(23) Huntsville-Decatur-Albertville,
AL—consisting of the HuntsvilleDecatur-Albertville, AL CSA;
(24) Indianapolis-Carmel-Muncie,
IN—consisting of the Indianapolis-
E:\FR\FM\01JNP1.SGM
01JNP1
rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 104 / Monday, June 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Carmel-Muncie, IN CSA and also
including Grant County, IN;
(25) Kansas City-Overland ParkKansas City, MO–KS—consisting of the
Kansas City-Overland Park-Kansas City,
MO–KS CSA and also including Jackson
County, KS, Jefferson County, KS, Osage
County, KS, Shawnee County, KS, and
Wabaunsee County, KS;
(26) Laredo, TX—consisting of the
Laredo, TX MSA;
(27) Las Vegas-Henderson, NV–AZ—
consisting of the Las Vegas-Henderson,
NV–AZ CSA;
(28) Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA—
consisting of the Los Angeles-Long
Beach, CA CSA and also including Kern
County, CA, and Santa Barbara County,
CA;
(29) Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Port St.
Lucie, FL—consisting of the Miami-Fort
Lauderdale-Port St. Lucie, FL CSA and
also including Monroe County, FL;
(30) Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha,
WI—consisting of the MilwaukeeRacine-Waukesha, WI CSA;
(31) Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN–WI—
consisting of the Minneapolis-St. Paul,
MN–WI CSA;
(32) New York-Newark, NY–NJ–CT–
PA—consisting of the New YorkNewark, NY–NJ–CT–PA CSA and also
including all of Joint Base McGuire-DixLakehurst;
(33) Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville,
FL—consisting of the Palm BayMelbourne-Titusville, FL MSA;
(34) Philadelphia-Reading-Camden,
PA–NJ–DE–MD—consisting of the
Philadelphia-Reading-Camden, PA–NJ–
DE–MD CSA, except for Joint Base
McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst;
(35) Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ—
consisting of the Phoenix-MesaScottsdale, AZ MSA;
(36) Pittsburgh-New Castle-Weirton,
PA–OH–WV—consisting of the
Pittsburgh-New Castle-Weirton, PA–
OH–WV CSA;
(37) Portland-Vancouver-Salem, OR–
WA—consisting of the PortlandVancouver-Salem, OR–WA CSA;
(38) Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill,
NC—consisting of the Raleigh-DurhamChapel Hill, NC CSA and also including
Cumberland County, NC, Hoke County,
NC, Robeson County, NC, Scotland
County, NC, and Wayne County, NC;
(39) Richmond, VA—consisting of the
Richmond, VA MSA and also including
Cumberland County, VA, King and
Queen County, VA, and Louisa County,
VA;
(40) Sacramento-Roseville, CA–NV—
consisting of the Sacramento-Roseville,
CA CSA and also including Carson City,
NV, and Douglas County, NV;
(41) San Diego-Carlsbad, CA—
consisting of the San Diego-Carlsbad,
CA MSA;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:29 May 29, 2015
Jkt 235001
(42) San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland,
CA—consisting of the San Jose-San
Francisco-Oakland, CA CSA and also
including Monterey County, CA;
(43) Seattle-Tacoma, WA—consisting
of the Seattle-Tacoma, WA CSA and
also including Whatcom County, WA;
(44) St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington,
MO–IL—consisting of the St. Louis-St.
Charles-Farmington, MO–IL CSA;
(45) Tucson-Nogales, AZ—consisting
of the Tucson-Nogales, AZ CSA and also
including Cochise County, AZ;
(46) Washington-Baltimore-Arlington,
DC–MD–VA–WV–PA—consisting of the
Washington-Baltimore-Arlington, DC–
MD–VA–WV–PA CSA and also
including Kent County, MD, Adams
County, PA, York County, PA, King
George County, VA, and Morgan
County, WV; and
(47) Rest of U.S.—consisting of those
portions of the United States and its
territories and possessions as listed in 5
CFR 591.205 not located within another
locality pay area.
[FR Doc. 2015–13135 Filed 5–29–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325–39–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
7 CFR Part 319
[Docket No. APHIS–2014–0106]
RIN 0579–AE10
Importation of Phalaenopsis Spp.
Plants for Planting in Approved
Growing Media From China to the
Continental United States
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
We are proposing to amend
the regulations governing the
importation of plants for planting to
authorize the importation of
Phalaenopsis spp. plants for planting
from China in approved growing media
into the continental United States,
subject to a systems approach. The
systems approach would consist of
measures that are currently specified in
the regulations as generally applicable
to all plants for planting authorized
importation into the United States in
approved growing media. This proposed
rule would allow for the importation of
Phalaenopsis spp. plants for planting
from China in approved growing media,
while providing protection against the
introduction of plant pests.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30959
We will consider all comments
that we receive on or before July 31,
2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by either of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2014-0106.
• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery:
Send your comment to Docket No.
APHIS–2014–0106, Regulatory Analysis
and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station
3A–03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118,
Riverdale, MD 20737–1238.
Supporting documents and any
comments we receive on this docket
may be viewed at https://
www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2014-0106 or
in our reading room, which is located in
room 1141 of the USDA South Building,
14th Street and Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading
room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except
holidays. To be sure someone is there to
help you, please call (202) 799–7039
before coming.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
´
Lydia E. Colon, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River
Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737–
1236; (301) 851–2302.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
Background
The regulations in 7 CFR part 319
prohibit or restrict the importation of
certain plants and plant products into
the United States to prevent the
introduction of quarantine plant pests.
The regulations contained in ‘‘Subpart—
Plants for Planting,’’ §§ 319.37 through
319.37–14 (referred to below as the
regulations), prohibit or restrict, among
other things, the importation of living
plants, plant parts, and seeds for
propagation or planting.
The regulations differentiate between
prohibited articles and restricted
articles. Prohibited articles are plants for
planting whose importation into the
United States is not authorized due to
the risk the articles present of
introducing or disseminating plant
pests. Restricted articles are articles
authorized importation into the United
States, provided that the articles are
subject to measures to address such risk.
Conditions for the importation into
the United States of restricted articles in
growing media are found in § 319.37–8.
Within that section, the introductory
text of paragraph (e) lists taxa of
restricted articles that may be imported
into the United States in approved
growing media, subject to the provisions
of a systems approach. Paragraph (e)(1)
of § 319.37–8 lists the approved growing
E:\FR\FM\01JNP1.SGM
01JNP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 104 (Monday, June 1, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30955-30959]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-13135]
========================================================================
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. 80, No. 104 / Monday, June 1, 2015 / Proposed
Rules
[[Page 30955]]
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
5 CFR Part 531
RIN 3206-AM88
General Schedule Locality Pay Areas
AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
ACTION: Proposed rule with request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Office of Personnel Management is issuing proposed
regulations on behalf of the President's Pay Agent to link the
definitions of General Schedule (GS) locality pay area boundaries to
updated metropolitan area definitions established by the Office of
Management and Budget in February 2013. Under this proposal, locations
that would otherwise move to a lower-paying locality pay area due to
use of the updated metropolitan area definitions in the locality pay
program would remain in their current locality pay area. This proposal
does not modify the current commuting and GS employment criteria used
in the locality pay program to evaluate, for possible inclusion in a
locality pay area, locations adjacent to the metropolitan area
comprising the basic locality pay area. However, regarding calculation
of commuting interchange rates used to evaluate such locations, the
locality pay area definitions proposed in this document reflect use of
the commuting patterns data collected as part of the American Community
Survey between 2006 and 2010, as recommended by the Federal Salary
Council in January 2014.
Under this proposal, 13 new locality pay areas would also be
established. The Federal Salary Council recommended these 13 locality
pay areas after reviewing pay levels in all ``Rest of U.S.''
metropolitan statistical areas and combined statistical areas with
2,500 or more GS employees. The Federal Salary Council found that the
percentage difference between GS and non-Federal pay levels for the
same levels of work--i.e., the pay disparity--in these 13 locations was
substantially greater than the ``Rest of U.S.'' pay disparity over an
extended period. The President's Pay Agent has agreed to issue proposed
regulations in response to the Federal Salary Council's recommendation
to establish the 13 new locality pay areas. Locality pay rates for the
new locality pay areas would be set by the President after the new
locality pay areas would be established by regulation.
DATES: We must receive comments on or before July 1, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by ``RIN 3206-AM88,'' by
any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Email: pay-leave-policy@opm.gov. Include ``RIN 3206-AM88'' in the
subject line of the message.
Fax: (202) 606-0824.
Mail: Brenda L. Roberts, Deputy Associate Director for Pay and
Leave, Office of Personnel Management, Room 7H31, 1900 E Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20415-8200.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe Ratcliffe, (202) 606-2838; fax:
(202) 606-0824; email: pay-leave-policy@opm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 5304 of title 5, United States Code
(U.S.C.), authorizes locality pay for General Schedule (GS) employees
with duty stations in the United States and its territories and
possessions. Section 5304(f) of title 5 U.S.C. 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 Pay Agent on the locality pay
program. The establishment or modification of locality pay area
boundaries must conform with the notice and comment provisions of the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553).
This proposal provides notice and invites comment on proposed
regulations to implement the Pay Agent's plan to link locality pay area
definitions to OMB-defined metropolitan areas, to use new commuting
patterns data for evaluating locations adjacent to the metropolitan
area comprising the basic locality pay area, and to establish 13 new
locality pay areas. (Annual Pay Agent reports on locality pay can be
found posted on the OPM Web site at https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/pay-systems/general-schedule/#url=Pay-Agent-Reports. The Pay Agent announced its plan to propose regulations
linking locality pay area boundaries to OMB-defined metropolitan areas
and using new commuting patterns data in its June 2014 report on
locality pay. The Pay Agent announced its plan to establish 12 of the
13 new locality pay areas in its May 2013 report on locality pay. The
Federal Salary Council, in its November 2014 recommendations,
recommended establishing Kansas City, MO-KS, as a new locality pay
area. Because the Federal Salary Council used the same selection
criteria as used for the 12 new locality pay areas the Pay Agent
tentatively approved, the Pay Agent proposes establishing Kansas City,
MO-KS as a new locality pay area.)
Linking Locality Pay Area Boundaries to OMB-Defined Metropolitan Areas
OMB-defined metropolitan areas have been the basis of locality pay
area boundaries since locality pay was implemented in 1994. OMB
periodically updates its definitions of metropolitan areas, and
regulations defining locality pay areas normally allow any minor
changes in OMB-defined metropolitan areas to be reflected in locality
pay area definitions automatically. However, because we anticipated
significant changes to metropolitan area definitions in 2013, in
January 2013, we revised the regulations defining locality pay areas so
that updates based on OMB's redefinitions would not automatically be
reflected in locality pay area definitions. (See Federal Register Vol.
78, No. 16, page 5115, January 24, 2013,
[[Page 30956]]
and the current definitions of ``CSA'' and ``MSA'' in 5 CFR 531.602.)
That action provided time for the Federal Salary Council and the Pay
Agent to review the updated metropolitan area definitions for
suitability for use in the locality pay program. As a result, locality
pay area definitions were frozen and are currently based on December
2009 OMB-defined metropolitan areas.
In February 2013, OMB issued new metropolitan area definitions, and
in its January 2014 recommendations to the Pay Agent, the Federal
Salary Council recommended that the Pay Agent use the February 2013
metropolitan area definitions in the locality pay program. The Pay
Agent, in its June 2014 report to the President on locality pay,
tentatively approved that recommendation, pending the issuance of
revised locality pay regulations. This proposed rule would implement
the change by revising the definitions of ``CSA'' and ``MSA'' in 5 CFR
531.602, to link the definitions of locality pay areas to the February
2013 OMB-defined metropolitan areas, and by updating the locality pay
area definitions in 5 CFR 531.603 accordingly. The proposed revisions
to the definitions of ``CSA'' and ``MSA'' in 5 CFR 531.602 would
provide that any OMB additions to the CSAs and MSAs comprising basic
locality pay areas would be reflected in locality pay area definitions
automatically. The proposed rule also implements the Pay Agent's plan
to retain, in their current locality pay area, any locations that would
otherwise move to a lower-paying locality pay area as a result of
linking locality pay area definitions to the February 2013 OMB-defined
metropolitan areas, as recommended by the Federal Salary Council. Under
this proposed rule, any such retained area would no longer be part of
the basic locality pay area due to use of the February 2013 OMB-defined
metropolitan areas and would be treated as an area of application.
OMB-defined metropolitan areas are called Core-Based Statistical
Areas (CBSAs) and are grouped into three categories: Micropolitan
Statistical Areas, where the largest included urban area has a
population of 10,000 to 49,999; Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs),
where the largest included urban area has a population of 50,000 or
more; and Combined Statistical Areas (CSAs), which are composed of two
or more adjacent CBSAs with an employment interchange measure of at
least 15 percent. (The employment interchange measure is the sum of the
percentage of workers living in the smaller entity who work in the
larger entity and the percentage of employment in the smaller entity
that is accounted for by workers who reside in the larger entity.) CBSA
definitions used for the locality pay program under this proposal are
contained in OMB Bulletin 13-01 of February 28, 2013, and are available
at https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/bulletins/2013/b-13-01.pdf.
Criteria for Areas of Application
As explained in the June 2014 Pay Agent report, locality pay areas
consist of 1) the main metropolitan area comprising the basic locality
pay area and, where criteria recommended by the Federal Salary Council
and approved by the Pay Agent are met, 2) areas of application. Areas
of application are locations that are adjacent to the basic locality
pay area and meet approved criteria for inclusion in the locality pay
area.
Current criteria for evaluating locations adjacent to a basic
locality pay area for possible inclusion in the locality pay area as
areas of application are as follows: For adjacent CSAs and adjacent
multi-county MSAs the criteria are 1,500 or more GS employees and a
commuting interchange rate of at least 7.5 percent. For adjacent single
counties, the criteria are 400 or more GS employees and a commuting
interchange rate of at least 7.5 percent. The commuting interchange
rate is defined as the sum of the percentage of employed residents of
the area under consideration who work in the basic locality pay area
and the percentage of the employment in the area under consideration
that is accounted for by workers who reside in the basic locality pay
area.
The locality pay program also has criteria for evaluating Federal
facilities that cross county lines into a separate locality pay area.
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.
New Commuting Patterns Data
As stated in the June 2014 Pay Agent report, new commuting patterns
data were collected as part of the American Community Survey from 2006
to 2010, and the Federal Salary Council recommended, in its January
2014 recommendations, using those data for evaluating potential areas
of application. The Pay Agent tentatively agreed in its June 2014
report that it would be appropriate to use the new commuting patterns
data for evaluating potential areas of application, and the areas of
application included in the locality pay area definitions in this
proposed rule, at 5 CFR 531.603(b), reflect use of the new commuting
patterns data for that purpose.
Locations Almost or Completely Surrounded by Higher-Paying Locality Pay
Areas
In its November 2012 recommendations, the Federal Salary Council
noted that, if its recommendations for changing pay area boundaries
were adopted, some areas currently in the ``Rest of U.S.'' locality pay
area and not meeting the criteria for areas of application would be
almost or completely surrounded by higher-paying locality pay areas.
The Federal Salary Council recommended that completely surrounded
locations be added to the locality pay area with which the surrounded
location has the highest level of commuting to and from the basic
locality pay area. For locations almost but not completely surrounded
by higher-paying locality pay areas, the Federal Salary Council
recommended that the Pay Agent evaluate, on a case-by-case basis, any
locations almost but not completely surrounded by separate pay areas.
The Federal Salary Council reiterated those recommendations in its
January 2014 recommendations.
Without criteria to address locations completely surrounded by
higher-paying locality pay areas, this proposal's changes to locality
pay area boundaries would leave Kent County, MD, and Lancaster County,
PA, in the ``Rest of U.S.'' locality pay area, and both counties could
also be completely surrounded by higher-paying locality pay areas. The
Pay Agent believes that single-county locations completely surrounded
by higher-paying locality pay areas should be included in the locality
pay area with the highest commuting interchange rate between the
surrounded county and the basic locality pay area. Accordingly, this
proposed rule would amend the locality pay area definitions at 5 CFR
531.603(b) to include Kent County, MD, in the Washington-Baltimore-
Arlington, DC-MD-VA-WV-PA locality pay area and Lancaster County, PA,
in the Harrisburg-York-Lebanon, PA, locality pay area.
The issue of how to address ``Rest of U.S.'' locations that are
almost but not completely surrounded by higher-paying locality pay
areas requires
[[Page 30957]]
careful consideration. The Pay Agent's preliminary view is that
partially surrounded locations warranting some action would most likely
be single ``Rest of U.S.'' counties--not multi-county metropolitan
areas or large groups of counties--that are bordered by multiple
higher-paying locality pay areas or are surrounded by water and
isolated as ``Rest of U.S.'' locations within a reasonable commuting
distance of a higher-paying locality pay area. The Pay Agent believes
any such ``Rest of U.S.'' locations considered for inclusion in a
separate locality pay area should be evaluated with criteria designed
to evaluate such locations. The Pay Agent invites public comment on
this issue.
Effect of Changes to Locality Pay Area Boundaries
This proposal would amend 5 CFR 531.603(b) to add the following
locations to existing locality pay areas:
Atlanta--Athens-Clarke County--Sandy Springs, GA
Clarke County, GA; Gordon County, GA; Jackson County, GA; Madison
County, GA; Morgan County, GA; Oconee County, GA; and Oglethorpe
County, GA.
Boston-Worcester-Providence, MA-RI-NH-CT-ME
Androscoggin County, ME; Cumberland County, ME; Sagadahoc County,
ME; and all portions of York County, ME, that are currently in the
``Rest of U.S.'' locality pay area.
Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI
Bureau County, IL; LaSalle County, IL; and Putnam County, IL.
Cincinnati-Wilmington-Maysville, OH-KY-IN
Mason County, KY, and Union County, IN.
Cleveland-Akron-Canton, OH
Carroll County, OH; Erie County, OH; Huron County, OH; Stark
County, OH; and Tuscarawas County, OH.
Columbus-Marion-Zanesville, OH
Guernsey County, OH; Hocking County, OH; Logan County, OH;
Muskingum County, OH; and Perry County, OH.
Dallas-Fort Worth, TX-OK
Bryan County, OK; Hopkins County, TX; and Navarro County, TX.
Dayton-Springfield-Sidney, OH
Shelby County, OH.
Houston-The Woodlands, TX
Trinity County, TX; Washington County, TX; and Wharton County, TX.
Huntsville-Decatur-Albertville, AL
Marshall County, AL.
Indianapolis-Carmel-Muncie, IN
Decatur County, IN; Delaware County, IN; and Jackson County, IN.
Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA
All portions of Kern County, CA, currently included in the ``Rest
of U.S.'' locality pay area.
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Port St. Lucie, FL
Indian River County, FL; Martin County, FL; Okeechobee County, FL;
and St. Lucie County, FL.
Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha, WI
Dodge County, WI; Jefferson County, WI; and Walworth County, WI.
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI
Le Sueur County, MN; Mille Lacs County, MN; and Sibley County, MN.
New York-Newark, NY-NJ-CT-PA
Carbon County, PA; Lehigh County, PA; and Northampton County, PA.
Pittsburgh-New Castle-Weirton, PA-OH-WV
Jefferson County, OH; Indiana County, PA; Brooke County, WV; and
Hancock County, WV.
Portland-Vancouver-Salem, OR-WA
Benton County, OR; Linn County, OR; and Cowlitz County, WA.
Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, NC
Lee County, NC; Robeson County, NC; Scotland County, NC; Vance
County, NC; and all portions of Granville County, NC, currently
included in the ``Rest of U.S.'' locality pay area.
Seattle-Tacoma, WA
Lewis County, WA.
Washington-Baltimore-Arlington, DC-MD-VA-WV-PA
Dorchester County, MD; Kent County, MD; Talbot County, MD; Franklin
County, PA; and Rappahannock County, VA.
Establishing 13 New Locality Pay Areas
Locality pay is set by comparing GS and non-Federal pay rates for
the same levels of work in each locality pay area. Non-Federal salary
survey data used to set locality pay rates are collected by the Bureau
of Labor Statistics (BLS). Over the last several years, BLS has
developed a method that permits Occupational Employment Statistics
(OES) data to be used for locality pay. OES data are available for all
MSAs and CSAs in the country and permit evaluation of salary levels in
many more locations than could be covered under the prior National
Compensation Survey alone.
The Federal Salary Council reviewed pay comparisons of GS and non-
Federal pay in all ``Rest of U.S.'' MSAs and CSAs with 2,500 or more GS
employees as of June 2011. Based on its review, the Federal Salary
Council recommended new locality pay areas be established for 12
metropolitan areas with pay gaps averaging more than 10 percentage
points above that for the ``Rest of U.S.'' locality pay area over an
extended period. The Federal Salary Council's recommendations are
posted on the OPM Web site at https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/pay-systems/general-schedule/federal-salary-council/recommendation12.pdf. In its November 2014 recommendations, using the
same selection methodology, the Federal Salary Council recommended that
Kansas City, MO-KS, also be established as a separate locality pay
area.
The President's Pay Agent has agreed to issue proposed regulations
in response to the Federal Salary Council's recommendation to establish
13 new locality pay areas and proposes to modify 5 CFR 531.603(b) to
add the new locality pay areas. The 13 new locality pay areas proposed
are Albany-Schenectady, NY; Albuquerque-Santa Fe-Las Vegas, NM; Austin-
Round Rock, TX; Charlotte-Concord, NC-SC; Colorado Springs, CO;
Davenport-Moline, IA-IL; Harrisburg-York-Lebanon, PA; Laredo, TX;
Kansas City-Overland Park-Kansas City, MO-KS; Las Vegas-Henderson, NV-
AZ; Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville, FL; St. Louis-St. Charles-
Farmington, MO-IL; and Tucson-Nogales, AZ. Locality pay rates for the
13 new locality pay areas would be set by the President at a later date
after they would be established by regulation.
Adjacent Areas Qualifying as Areas of Application to New Locality Pay
Areas
Applying the criteria explained above for evaluating locations
adjacent to basic locality pay areas as areas of application, this
proposed rule would add the following counties to the new locality pay
areas at 5 CFR 531.603(b): Fremont County, CO, and Pueblo County, CO,
to the Colorado Springs, CO, locality pay area; Lancaster County, PA,
to the Harrisburg-York-Lebanon, PA, locality pay area; Jackson County,
KS, Jefferson County, KS, Osage County,
[[Page 30958]]
KS, Shawnee County, KS, and Wabaunsee County, KS to the Kansas City-
Overland Park-Kansas City, MO-KS, locality pay area; and Cochise
County, AZ, to the Tucson-Nogales, AZ, locality pay area.
Regarding the criteria explained above for evaluating Federal
facilities that cross locality pay area boundaries, the Pay Agent is
not aware of any Federal facilities that qualify for inclusion in the
new locality pay areas under these criteria.
Impact and Implementation
Using February 2013 CBSA definitions as the basis for locality pay
area boundaries and using updated commuting patterns data to evaluate
potential areas of application would add a number of counties now
covered by ``Rest of U.S.'' locality pay to higher-paying locality pay
areas, which would impact about 6,300 GS employees.
The proposal to establish 13 new locality pay areas would impact
about 102,000 GS employees. Implementing that proposal would not
automatically change locality pay rates now applicable in those areas
because locality pay percentages are established by Executive order
under the President's authority in 5 U.S.C. 5304 or 5304a, and the
President decides each year whether to increase locality pay
percentages. When locality pay percentages are increased, past practice
has been to allocate a percent of the total GS payroll for locality
raises and to have the overall dollar cost for such pay raises be the
same, regardless of the number of locality pay areas. If a percent of
the total GS payroll is allocated for locality pay increases, the
addition of new areas results in a smaller amount to allocate for
locality pay increases in existing areas. Implementing higher locality
pay rates in the 13 new locality pay areas could thus result in
relatively lower pay increases for employees in existing locality pay
areas than they would otherwise receive.
Executive Order 13563 and Executive Order 12866
OMB has reviewed this rule in accordance with E.O. 13563 and 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.
Katherine Archuleta,
Director.
Accordingly, OPM is proposing to amend 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. 5303(g), 5305,
5333, 5334(a) and (b), and 7701(b)(2); Subpart D also issued under 5
U.S.C. 5335 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, and 5941(a),
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 F--Locality-Based Comparability Payments
0
2. In Sec. 531.602, the definitions of CSA and MSA are revised to read
as follows:
Sec. 531.602 Definitions.
* * * * *
CSA means the geographic scope of a Combined Statistical Area, as
defined by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in OMB Bulletin
No. 13-01, plus any areas subsequently added to the CSA by OMB.
* * * * *
MSA means the geographic scope of a Metropolitan Statistical Area,
as defined by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in OMB Bulletin
No. 13-01, plus any areas subsequently added to the MSA by OMB.
* * * * *
0
3. 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 the purposes of this
subpart:
(1) Alaska--consisting of the State of Alaska;
(2) Albany-Schenectady, NY--consisting of the Albany-Schenectady,
NY CSA;
(3) Albuquerque-Santa Fe-Las Vegas, NM--consisting of the
Albuquerque-Santa Fe-Las Vegas, NM CSA;
(4) Atlanta--Athens-Clarke County--Sandy Springs, GA-AL--consisting
of the Atlanta--Athens-Clarke County--Sandy Springs, GA CSA and also
including Chambers County, AL;
(5) Austin-Round Rock, TX--consisting of the Austin-Round Rock, TX
MSA;
(6) Boston-Worcester-Providence, MA-RI-NH-CT-ME--consisting of the
Boston-Worcester-Providence, MA-RI-NH-CT CSA, except for Windham
County, CT, and also including Androscoggin County, ME, Cumberland
County, ME, Sagadahoc County, ME, and York County, ME;
(7) Buffalo-Cheektowaga, NY--consisting of the Buffalo-Cheektowaga,
NY CSA;
(8) Charlotte-Concord, NC-SC--consisting of the Charlotte-Concord,
NC-SC CSA;
(9) Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI--consisting of the Chicago-
Naperville, IL-IN-WI CSA;
(10) Cincinnati-Wilmington-Maysville, OH-KY-IN--consisting of the
Cincinnati-Wilmington-Maysville, OH-KY-IN CSA and also including
Franklin County, IN;
(11) Cleveland-Akron-Canton, OH--consisting of the Cleveland-Akron-
Canton, OH CSA;
(12) Colorado Springs, CO--consisting of the Colorado Springs, CO
MSA and also including Fremont County, CO, and Pueblo County, CO;
(13) Columbus-Marion-Zanesville, OH--consisting of the Columbus-
Marion-Zanesville, OH CSA;
(14) Dallas-Fort Worth, TX-OK--consisting of the Dallas-Fort Worth,
TX-OK CSA and also including Delta County, TX, and Fannin County, TX;
(15) Davenport-Moline, IA-IL--consisting of the Davenport-Moline,
IA-IL CSA;
(16) Dayton-Springfield-Sidney, OH--consisting of the Dayton-
Springfield-Sidney, OH CSA and also including Preble County, OH;
(17) Denver-Aurora, CO--consisting of the Denver-Aurora, CO CSA and
also including Larimer County, CO;
(18) Detroit-Warren-Ann Arbor, MI--consisting of the Detroit-
Warren-Ann Arbor, MI CSA;
(19) Harrisburg-York-Lebanon, PA--consisting of the Harrisburg-
York-Lebanon, PA CSA, except for and Adams County, PA, and York County,
PA, and also including Lancaster County, PA;
(20) Hartford-West Hartford, CT-MA--consisting of the Hartford-West
Hartford, CT CSA and also including Windham County, CT, Franklin
County, MA, Hampden County, MA, and Hampshire County, MA;
(21) Hawaii--consisting of the State of Hawaii;
(22) Houston-The Woodlands, TX--consisting of the Houston-The
Woodlands, TX CSA and also including San Jacinto County, TX;
(23) Huntsville-Decatur-Albertville, AL--consisting of the
Huntsville-Decatur-Albertville, AL CSA;
(24) Indianapolis-Carmel-Muncie, IN--consisting of the
Indianapolis-
[[Page 30959]]
Carmel-Muncie, IN CSA and also including Grant County, IN;
(25) Kansas City-Overland Park-Kansas City, MO-KS--consisting of
the Kansas City-Overland Park-Kansas City, MO-KS CSA and also including
Jackson County, KS, Jefferson County, KS, Osage County, KS, Shawnee
County, KS, and Wabaunsee County, KS;
(26) Laredo, TX--consisting of the Laredo, TX MSA;
(27) Las Vegas-Henderson, NV-AZ--consisting of the Las Vegas-
Henderson, NV-AZ CSA;
(28) Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA--consisting of the Los Angeles-Long
Beach, CA CSA and also including Kern County, CA, and Santa Barbara
County, CA;
(29) Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Port St. Lucie, FL--consisting of the
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Port St. Lucie, FL CSA and also including Monroe
County, FL;
(30) Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha, WI--consisting of the Milwaukee-
Racine-Waukesha, WI CSA;
(31) Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI--consisting of the Minneapolis-St.
Paul, MN-WI CSA;
(32) New York-Newark, NY-NJ-CT-PA--consisting of the New York-
Newark, NY-NJ-CT-PA CSA and also including all of Joint Base McGuire-
Dix-Lakehurst;
(33) Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville, FL--consisting of the Palm Bay-
Melbourne-Titusville, FL MSA;
(34) Philadelphia-Reading-Camden, PA-NJ-DE-MD--consisting of the
Philadelphia-Reading-Camden, PA-NJ-DE-MD CSA, except for Joint Base
McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst;
(35) Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ--consisting of the Phoenix-Mesa-
Scottsdale, AZ MSA;
(36) Pittsburgh-New Castle-Weirton, PA-OH-WV--consisting of the
Pittsburgh-New Castle-Weirton, PA-OH-WV CSA;
(37) Portland-Vancouver-Salem, OR-WA--consisting of the Portland-
Vancouver-Salem, OR-WA CSA;
(38) Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, NC--consisting of the Raleigh-
Durham-Chapel Hill, NC CSA and also including Cumberland County, NC,
Hoke County, NC, Robeson County, NC, Scotland County, NC, and Wayne
County, NC;
(39) Richmond, VA--consisting of the Richmond, VA MSA and also
including Cumberland County, VA, King and Queen County, VA, and Louisa
County, VA;
(40) Sacramento-Roseville, CA-NV--consisting of the Sacramento-
Roseville, CA CSA and also including Carson City, NV, and Douglas
County, NV;
(41) San Diego-Carlsbad, CA--consisting of the San Diego-Carlsbad,
CA MSA;
(42) San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA--consisting of the San
Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA CSA and also including Monterey County,
CA;
(43) Seattle-Tacoma, WA--consisting of the Seattle-Tacoma, WA CSA
and also including Whatcom County, WA;
(44) St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington, MO-IL--consisting of the St.
Louis-St. Charles-Farmington, MO-IL CSA;
(45) Tucson-Nogales, AZ--consisting of the Tucson-Nogales, AZ CSA
and also including Cochise County, AZ;
(46) Washington-Baltimore-Arlington, DC-MD-VA-WV-PA--consisting of
the Washington-Baltimore-Arlington, DC-MD-VA-WV-PA CSA and also
including Kent County, MD, Adams County, PA, York County, PA, King
George County, VA, and Morgan County, WV; and
(47) Rest of U.S.--consisting of those portions of the United
States and its territories and possessions as listed in 5 CFR 591.205
not located within another locality pay area.
[FR Doc. 2015-13135 Filed 5-29-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-39-P
