# Pay Under the General Schedule; Locality-Based Comparability Payments > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A94-25697 ## Record - **Collection:** Federal Register - **Document type:** Uncategorized Document - **Published:** October 18, 1994 ## Text OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT 5 CFR Part 531 RIN 3206-AG39 Pay Under the General Schedule; Locality-Based Comparability Payments agency: Office of Personnel Management. action: Proposed rule with request for comments. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- summary: The Office of Personnel Management is issuing proposed regulations to remove six metropolitan areas from the ``Rest of U.S.'' locality pay area and establish six new locality pay areas corresponding to these metropolitan areas. These proposed changes are based on a recommendation of the Federal Salary Council and are subject to certain conditions set forth by the Council for the purpose of applying locality-based comparability payments in January 1995 under the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990. The purpose of this notice is to solicit public comments on the boundaries of locality pay areas recommended by the Federal Salary Council before the President's Pay Agent makes a final determination on this matter. dates: Comments must be received on or before November 17, 1994. addresses: Comments may be sent or delivered to Donald J. Winstead, Acting Assistant Director for Compensation Policy, Personnel Systems and Oversight Group, Office of Personnel Management, Room 6H31, 1900 E Street NW., Washington, DC 20415. for further information contact: Donald J. Winstead, (202) 606-2880. supplementary information: Section 5304(a)(1) of title 5, United States Code, provides that comparability payments shall be payable within each locality determined to have a pay disparity greater than 5 percent. Section 5304(f)(1) authorizes the President's Pay Agent (consisting of 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 provide for such pay localities as the Pay Agent considers appropriate. In so doing, 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 and representatives of Federal employee organizations. Members of the Federal Salary Council are appointed by the President and meet regularly to consider issues related to the locality pay system for General Schedule employees. For the 1994 locality payments, the Federal Salary Council recommended establishing a total of 28 locality pay areas. These consisted of 27 areas corresponding to Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA's) or Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Areas (CMSA's), including ``areas of application'' contiguous to 2 CMSA's, plus 1 area composed of the ``Rest of U.S.'' (i.e., those portions of the 48 contiguous States not located within another locality pay area). MSA's and CMSA's are defined by OMB. After reviewing public comments on this proposal, the Pay Agent adopted the Federal Salary Council's recommendations on locality pay areas in their entirety. (See 58 FR 69169, December 30, 1993, and 5 CFR 531.603(b).) On September 20, 1994, the Federal Salary Council presented its recommendations to the Pay Agent concerning the areas in which locality-based comparability payments should be paid beginning in January 1995. The Council recommended the removal of six metropolitan areas from the ``Rest of U.S.'' locality pay area and the establishment of six new locality pay areas corresponding to these metropolitan areas. The MSA's and CMSA's affected by this recommendation are the following: (1) Albuquerque, NM; (2) Columbus, OH; (3) Miami-Fort Lauderdale, FL; (4) New Orleans, LA; (5) Portland-Salem, OR-WA; and (6) Richmond-Petersburg, VA. As noted in the Council's memorandum to the Pay Agent, these six metropolitan areas are those in which the Bureau of Labor Statistics conducted additional local salary surveys in 1993- 94 at the direction of the Pay Agent. These 6 new locality pay areas would be in addition to the 28 locality pay areas established for the 1994 locality payments. In its memorandum to the Pay Agent, the Federal Salary Council noted that the pay disparities (between Federal and non-Federal pay rates for the same levels of work) in the 6 recommended new areas and the 27 previously established locality pay areas corresponding to MSA's/CMSA's cannot be determined at this time because some of the data needed to make this determination are not yet available. The Council further stated its belief that any area in which the pay disparity is 2/10ths of a percentage point or more below the pay disparity for ``Rest of U.S.'' should be dropped as a separate pay locality and combined with ``Rest of U.S.'' Thus, it is possible that once all of the data needed to make this determination become available, one or more of the areas listed in Sec. 531.603(b) of this proposed rule may not meet the test recommended by the Federal Salary Council. The Federal Salary Council's memorandum to the Pay Agent also noted that the identification of ``areas of application''--i.e., areas contiguous to an MSA or CMSA that are included in the corresponding pay locality for locality pay purposes--has received considerable attention by the Council. During the past year, the Council has received requests covering 10 separate geographic areas for removal from the ``Rest of U.S.'' locality pay area and inclusion in one of the remaining 27 locality pay areas with higher rates. After carefully considering the application of the criteria developed for the 1994 locality payments and the possibility of revising these criteria, the Council has determined that it continues to be in the best interest of the locality pay program to use the same criteria applied by the Council last year for ``areas of application.'' Although the criteria applied by the Council for the January 1994 locality payments remain the same in substance, the Council's memorandum to the Pay Agent included a clarification of the criterion that makes use of Census Bureau data on commuting patterns for the purpose of determining ``economic linkage'' with a pay locality. (See item A.4., below.) The criteria applied by the Federal Salary Council in making its recommendations on ``areas of application'' for the January 1995 locality payments, as stated in an attachment to the Council's memorandum of September 20, 1994, are as follows: Criteria for Recommendation as Areas of Application to Pay Localities A. County-wide areas of application. To be considered, the affected county must, 1. Be contiguous to a pay locality 2. Contain at least 2,000 GS-GM employees 3. Have a significant level of urbanization, based on 1990 Census data. A ``significant level of urbanization'' is defined as a population density of more than 200 per square mile or at least 90 percent of the population in urbanized areas. 4. Demonstrate some economic linkage with the pay locality, defined as commuting at a level of 5 percent or more into or from the areas in question. The areas in question are the contiguous county under consideration and the central counties (or in the case of New England, the central cores) identified by the Census Bureau for the process of defining the CMSA's or MSA's involved. B. Federal facilities crossing pay locality boundaries. To be included in the pay locality the portion of a federal facility which crosses pay locality boundaries and which is not in the pay locality must, Have at least 1,000 GS-GM employees, Have the duty station(s) of the majority of GS-GM employees within 10 miles of the prime critical survey boundary area, and Have a significant number of its employees commuting from the pay locality. Based on the criteria developed by the Federal Salary Council for the January 1994 locality-based comparability payments, the Council recommended in August 1993 that Santa Barbara County, CA, be considered as an ``area of application'' within the Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA, locality pay area and that St. Mary's County, MD, be considered as an ``area of application'' within the Washington- Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV, locality pay area under the criteria for county-wide areas of application. In addition, the Council recommended that the portion of Edwards Air Force Base, CA, which lies outside the Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA CMSA be considered as an ``area of application'' within the Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA, locality pay area under the criteria for Federal facilities crossing pay locality boundaries. As noted above, the Pay Agent accepted these recommendations in their entirety. The Federal Salary Council's recommendation to the Pay Agent for the January 1995 locality payments relies on the same criteria applied by the Council for the previous year, as clarified above. The Council has determined that no additional counties or Federal facilities meet these criteria. Based on the Council's recommendation, the proposed regulations do not include any new ``areas of application'' within the locality pay areas listed in Sec. 531.603(b). After the 30-day public comment period on these proposed regulations, the Pay Agent will consider the comments received from Federal employees, agencies, employee organizations, and other interested parties before making its determination on the establishment of pay localities. The Pay Agent also will consider any additional views and recommendations expressed directly to the Pay Agent by any member of the Federal Salary Council or by employee organizations not represented on the Council. The final regulations issued by OPM will reflect the Pay Agent's final determination on this matter. E.O. 12866, Regulatory Review This rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget in accordance with E.O. 12866. Regulatory Flexibility Act I certify that these regulations would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because they would apply only to Federal agencies and employees. List of Subjects 5 CFR Part 531 Government employees, Law enforcement officers, Wages. U.S. Office of Personnel Management. James B. King, Director. Accordingly, OPM is proposing to amend part 531 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: PART 531--PAY UNDER THE GENERAL SCHEDULE 1. The authority citation for part 531 is revised to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5115, 5307, 5338; sec. 4 of Pub. L. 103-89, 107 Stat. 981; and E.O. 12748, 56 FR 4521, February 4, 1991, 3 CFR 1991 Comp., p. 316; Subpart A also issued under section 302 of the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (FEPCA), Pub. L. 101-509, 104 Stat. 1462; 5 U.S.C. 5304, 5305, and 5553; and E.O. 12786, 56 FR 67453, December 30, 1991, 3 CFR 1991 Comp., p. 376; Subpart B also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5303(g), 5333, 5334(a), and 7701(b)(2); Subpart C also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5304, 5305, 5553; sections 302 and 404 of FEPCA, Pub. L. 101-509, 104 Stat. 1462 and 1466; and section 3(7) of Pub. L. 102-378 (October 2, 1992), 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, November 29, 1993, 3 CFR 1993 Comp., p. 682. Subpart F--Locality-Based Comparability Payments 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 the purpose of this subpart: (1) Albuquerque, NM--consisting of the Albuquerque, NM MSA; (2) Atlanta, GA--consisting of the Atlanta, GA MSA; (3) Boston-Worcester-Lawrence, MA-NH-ME-CT--consisting of the Boston-Worcester-Lawrence, MA-NH-ME-CT CMSA; (4) Chicago-Gary-Kenosha, IL-IN-WI--consisting of the Chicago-Gary- Kenosha, IL-IN-WI CMSA; (5) Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN--consisting of the Cincinnati- Hamilton, OH-KY-IN CMSA; (6) Cleveland-Akron, OH--consisting of the Cleveland-Akron, OH CMSA; (7) Columbus, OH--consisting of the Columbus, OH MSA; (8) Dallas-Fort Worth, TX--consisting of the Dallas-Fort Worth, TX CMSA; (9) Dayton-Springfield, OH--consisting of the Dayton-Springfield, OH MSA; (10) Denver-Boulder-Greeley, CO--consisting of the Denver-Boulder- Greeley, CO CMSA; (11) Detroit-Ann Arbor-Flint, MI--consisting of the Detroit-Ann Arbor-Flint, MI CMSA; (12) Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX--consisting of the Houston- Galveston-Brazoria, TX CMSA; (13) Huntsville, AL--consisting of the Huntsville, AL MSA; (14) Indianapolis, IN--consisting of the Indianapolis, IN MSA; (15) Kansas City, MO-KS--consisting of the Kansas City, MO-KS MSA; (16) Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA--consisting of the Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA CMSA, plus Santa Barbara County, CA, and that portion of Edwards Air Force Base, CA, not located within the Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA CMSA; (17) Memphis, TN-AR-MS MSA--consisting of the Memphis, TN-AR-MS MSA; (18) Miami-Fort Lauderdale, FL--consisting of the Miami-Fort Lauderdale, FL CMSA; (19) New Orleans, LA--consisting of the New Orleans, LA MSA; (20) New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT-PA-- consisting of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT-PA CMSA; (21) Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Newport News, VA-NC--consisting of the Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Newport News, VA-NC MSA; (22) Oklahoma City, OK--consisting of the Oklahoma City, OK MSA; (23) Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-DE-MD--consisting of the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-DE-MD CMSA; (24) Portland-Salem, OR-WA--consisting of the Portland-Salem, OR-WA CMSA; (25) Richmond-Petersburg, VA--consisting of the Richmond- Petersburg, VA MSA; (26) Sacramento-Yolo, CA--consisting of the Sacramento-Yolo, CA CMSA; (27) St. Louis, MO-IL--consisting of the St. Louis, MO-IL MSA; (28) Salt Lake City-Ogden, UT--consisting of the Salt Lake City- Ogden, UT MSA; (29) San Antonio, TX--consisting of the San Antonio, TX MSA; (30) San Diego, CA--consisting of the San Diego, CA MSA; (31) San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA--consisting of the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA CMSA; (32) Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton, WA--consisting of the Seattle- Tacoma-Bremerton, WA CMSA; (33) Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV--consisting of the Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV CMSA, plus St. Mary's County, MD; and (34) Rest of U.S.--consisting of those portions of the continental United States not located within another locality pay area. [FR Doc. 94-25697 Filed 10-17-94; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6325-01-M --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A94-25697. Public record. Not legal advice.