Pay Under the General Schedule; Locality Pay Areas for 1998

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

5 CFR Part 531

RIN 3206-AH65

Pay Under the General Schedule; Locality Pay Areas for 1998

AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel Management is issuing final

regulations to remove two metropolitan areas from the ``Rest of U.S.''

locality pay area and establish two new locality pay areas in January

1998 corresponding to these metropolitan areas. The two metropolitan

areas affected by this regulation are Hartford, CT, and Orlando, FL.

The President's Pay Agent made the final determination on the

boundaries of the new locality pay areas after considering the

recommendations of the Federal Salary Council and public comments.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The regulations are effective on January 1, 1998, and

are applicable on the first day of the first pay period beginning on or

after January 1, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeanne D. Jacobson, (202) 606-2858,

FAX: (202) 606-0824, or email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 25, 1996, the Office of Personnel

Management (OPM) published proposed regulations to remove two

metropolitan areas from the ``Rest of U.S.'' locality pay area and

establish two new locality pay areas in January 1998 corresponding to

these metropolitan areas based on the recommendations of the Federal

Salary Council. (See 61 FR 55227.) OPM received no public comments on

the proposed regulations. Therefore, after considering the views of the

Federal Salary Council, 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 OPM) decided to adopt the Federal Salary

Council's recommendations on the two new locality pay areas. This

determination was reflected in the Pay Agent's November 27, 1996,

report to the President. These final regulations list the locality pay

areas for 1998, including the two new locality pay areas corresponding

to the following Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA's) as defined by

OMB--Hartford, CT, including that portion of New London County, CT,

outside the Hartford, CT MSA, and Orlando, FL.

The definitions of the MSA's and Consolidated Metropolitan

Statistical Areas (CMSA's) that comprise the locality pay areas are

found in OMB Bulletin No. 96-08, June 28, 1996. Based on these

definitions, the two new locality pay areas for 1998 will be composed

of the following geographic areas:

Hartford, CT, Locality Pay Area

Hartford County (part):

Avon town

Berlin town

Bloomfield town

Bristol city

Burlington town

Canton town

East Granby town

East Hartford town

East Windsor town

Enfield town

Farmington town

Glastonbury town

Granby town

Hartford city

Manchester town

Marlborough town

New Britain city

Newington town

Plainville town

Rocky Hill town

Simsbury town

Southington town

South Windsor town

Suffield town

West Hartford town

Wethersfield town

Windsor town

Windsor Locks town

Litchfield County (part):

Barkhamsted town

Harwinton town

New Hartford town

Plymouth town

Winchester town

Middlesex County (part):

Cromwell town

Durham town

East Haddam town

East Hampton town

Haddam town

Middlefield town

Middletown city

Portland town

New London County (all)

Tolland County (part):

Andover town

Bolton town

Columbia town

Coventry town

Ellington town

Hebron town

Mansfield town

Somers town

Stafford town

Tolland town

Vernon town

Willington town

Windham County (part):

Ashford town

Chaplin town

Windham town

Orlando, FL, Locality Pay Area

Lake County

Orange County

Osceola County

Seminole County

Hartford, CT, Locality Pay Area

In its November, 27, 1996, report to the President, the President's

Pay Agent accepted the Federal Salary Council's recommendation that

Hartford, CT, be established as a separate locality pay area for

General Schedule (GS) workers in 1998, including the Hartford, CT MSA,

plus that portion of New London County, CT, outside the Hartford, CT

MSA. The Pay Agent also adopted the following criteria recommended by

the Federal Salary Council for consideration of partial counties as

``areas of application'' in New England. These criteria are needed

because OMB uses cities and townships, instead of full counties, to

define metropolitan areas in New England.

Criteria for partial-county areas of application in New England:

1. The partial-county area must be contiguous to the pay locality

(exclusive

[[Page 65312]]

of any other areas of application) and must currently be included in

the ``Rest of U.S.'' locality pay area.

2. The partial-county area must contain at least 2,000 GS

employees.

3. The entire county must have a population density of more than

200 per square mile or at least 90 percent of the population in

urbanized areas.

4. The entire county must 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

entire county under consideration and the central core of the MSA as

defined by the Census Bureau for use in establishing metropolitan

areas.)

Because New London County, CT, met all of the above-stated

criteria, the Pay Agent accepted the Federal Salary Council's

recommendation that that portion of New London County, CT, outside the

Hartford, CT MSA be included in the Hartford, CT, locality pay area as

an ``area of application'' for 1998.

After the Pay Agent issued its November 1996 report to the

President reflecting its determination to establish Hartford, CT, as a

new locality pay area for 1998, OPM received a letter from a Member of

Congress expressing interest in including the city of Springfield, MA,

in the Hartford, CT, locality pay area. The Federal Salary Council

determined that Hampden County, MA, which includes the city of

Springfield, does not meet the Federal Salary Council's criteria for

consideration as an ``area of application.''

Prior to the implementation of locality pay in 1994, the

President's Pay Agent adopted the Federal Salary Council's

recommendation that the boundaries of locality pay areas follow the

boundaries of MSA's and CMSA's as defined by OMB. The Federal Salary

Council also recommended that certain areas outside the boundaries of

an MSA or CMSA (i.e., ``areas of application'') be included in the

locality pay area if they meet certain criteria.

In order for the Federal Salary Council to recommend an area as a

county-wide area of application, 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; and

4. Demonstration 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 and MSA's involved.)

The Federal Salary Council considered Hampden County, MA, under

these criteria as a potential area of application before making its

October 1996 recommendation to the Pay Agent regarding the new

Hartford, CT, locality pay area. However, because Hampden County did

not pass the Federal Salary Council's criterion for GS employment

(having only 908 GS employees as of March 1996), the Federal Salary

Council did not recommend it as an ``area of application'' to the

Hartford, CT, locality pay area.

Orlando, FL, Locality Pay Area

The President's Pay Agent accepted the Federal Salary Council's

recommendation that Orlando, FL, be established as a separate locality

pay area. Although Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) surveys showed the

pay disparity in Orlando was slightly below the pay disparity for the

``Rest of U.S.'' locality pay area, the Federal Salary Council's

established policy provides that any surveyed area with a pay disparity

of less than 2/10ths of a percentage point below the ``Rest of U.S.''

pay disparity may qualify to be established or continued as a locality

pay area.

The Pay Agent also accepted the Federal Salary Council's

recommendation that the Orlando, FL, locality pay percentage be set

equal to the ``Rest of U.S.'' locality pay percentage in 1998 and that

the Orlando, FL, pay gap be averaged with the ``Rest of U.S.'' pay gap

to determine the combined pay gap for the two areas. This is consistent

with past practices for dealing with locality pay areas in which the

pay disparity is below the ``Rest of U.S.'' pay disparity. BLS will

continue to conduct surveys in Orlando, and the Pay Agent and the

Federal Salary Council will reconsider these issues in the future.

Waiver of Delay in Effective Date

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), I find that good cause exists to

make these regulations effective in less than 30 days. The regulations

are being made effective on January 1, 1998, in order for the locality

payments for each locality pay area authorized for 1998 to be

applicable on the first day of the first pay period beginning on or

after January 1, 1998.

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.

Janice R. Lachance,

Director.

Accordingly, OPM is amending 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 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5115, 5307, and 5338; sec. 4 of Pub. L. 103-

89, 107 Stat. 981; and E.O. 12748, 56 FR 4521, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p.

316;

Subpart B also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5303(g), 5333, 5334(a), and

7701(b)(2);

Subpart C also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5304, 5305, and 5553;

sections 302 and 404 of 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;

Subpart G also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5304, 5305, and 5553;

section 302 of the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990

(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 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) Atlanta, GA--consisting of the Atlanta, GA MSA;

(2) Boston-Worcester-Lawrence, MA-NH-ME-CT--consisting of the

Boston-Worcester-Lawrence, MA-NH-ME-CT CMSA;

(3) Chicago-Gary-Kenosha, IL-IN-WI--consisting of the Chicago-Gary-

Kenosha, IL-IN-WI CMSA;

(4) Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN--consisting of the Cincinnati-

Hamilton, OH-KY-IN CMSA;

[[Page 65313]]

(5) Cleveland-Akron, OH--consisting of the Cleveland-Akron, OH

CMSA;

(6) Columbus, OH--consisting of the Columbus, OH MSA;

(7) Dallas-Fort Worth, TX--consisting of the Dallas-Fort Worth, TX

CMSA;

(8) Dayton-Springfield, OH--consisting of the Dayton-Springfield,

OH MSA;

(9) Denver-Boulder-Greeley, CO--consisting of the Denver-Boulder-

Greeley, CO CMSA;

(10) Detroit-Ann Arbor-Flint, MI--consisting of the Detroit-Ann

Arbor-Flint, MI CMSA;

(11) Hartford, CT--consisting of the Hartford, CT MSA, plus that

portion of New London County, CT, not located within the Hartford, CT

MSA;

(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) Miami-Fort Lauderdale, FL--consisting of the Miami-Fort

Lauderdale, FL CMSA;

(18) Milwaukee-Racine, WI--consisting of the Milwaukee-Racine, WI

CMSA;

(19) Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI--consisting of the Minneapolis-St.

Paul, MN-WI 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) Orlando, FL--consisting of the Orlando, FL MSA;

(22) Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-DE-MD--

consisting of the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-DE-MD

CMSA;

(23) Pittsburgh, PA--consisting of the Pittsburgh, PA MSA;

(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) San Diego, CA--consisting of the San Diego, CA MSA;

(29) San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA--consisting of the San

Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA CMSA;

(30) Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton, WA--consisting of the Seattle-

Tacoma-Bremerton, WA CMSA;

(31) Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV--consisting of the

Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV CMSA, plus St. Mary's County, MD; and

(32) Rest of U.S.--consisting of those portions of the 48

contiguous States not located in another locality pay area.

[FR Doc. 97-32580 Filed 12-11-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6325-01-U