Skip to main content
Policy Workbench

Prototype for the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Built on public data; not an official OPM system.

Powered by Concourse

Prevailing Rate Systems; Redefinition of the Arapahoe-Denver, Colorado, Nonappropriated Fund Federal Wage System Wage Area

Federal RegisterProposed ruleFinalized: Finalized by 89 FR 67519 (Aug. 21, 2024)

89 FR 36720

Finalized by 89 FR 67519 (Aug. 21, 2024)

“Final rule.”

Matched by regulation identifier number (RIN).

Text

18 passages

89 FR 36720Prevailing Rate Systems; Redefinition of the Arapahoe-Denver, Colorado, Nonappropriated Fund Federal Wage System Wage Area

Agency

89 FR 36720Office of Personnel Management.

Summary

89 FR 36720The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is proposing a rule to remove Denver County, CO, from the Arapahoe-Denver, CO, nonappropriated fund (NAF) Federal Wage System (FWS) wage area. In addition, OPM proposes to change the name of the Arapahoe-Denver NAF FWS wage area to Arapahoe. These changes are necessary because no NAF FWS employment has been reported in Denver County since 2018.

Dates

89 FR 36720Send comments on or before June 3, 2024.

Addresses

89 FR 36720You may submit comments, identified by docket number and/or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) and title, by the following method: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number or RIN for this document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing at https://www.regulations.gov without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

For Further Information Contact

89 FR 36720Ana Paunoiu, by telephone at (202) 606-2858 or by email at paypolicy@opm.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

89 FR 36720Under 5 CFR 532.219, OPM may establish an NAF wage area when there are a minimum of 26 NAF wage employees in the survey area, a local activity has the capability to host annual local wage surveys, and the survey area has at least 1,800 private enterprise employees in establishments within survey specifications. The Arapahoe-Denver, CO, NAF wage area is presently composed of two survey area counties, Arapahoe and Denver Counties, CO, and one area of application county, Mesa County, CO. The Department of Defense (DOD) notified OPM that the Defense Finance Cafeteria that was located in Denver County closed in 2010 and the Denver Outpatient Clinic moved to Arapahoe County in 2018. This leaves no NAF FWS employment in Denver County. Under 5 U.S.C. 5343(a)(1)(B)(i), NAF wage areas “shall not extend beyond the immediate locality in which the particular prevailing rate employees are employed.” Therefore, Denver County should not be defined as part of an NAF wage area. With the removal of Denver County, the renamed Arapahoe wage area would consist of one survey county, Arapahoe County, CO, and one area of application county, Mesa County, CO. DOD indicates that there are about 65 NAF FWS employees working in the survey area, and the area has a local activity, Buckley Space Force Base, capable of hosting the wage survey. There are also 4 NAF FWS employees in Mesa County. The Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee, the national labor-management committee responsible for advising OPM on matters concerning the pay of FWS employees, recommended these changes by consensus. These changes would be effective on the first day of the first applicable pay period beginning on or after 30 days following publication of the final regulations.

Expected Impact of This Proposed Rule

89 FR 36720Under 5 U.S.C. 5343, OPM has the authority and responsibility to define the boundaries of NAF FWS wage areas. Any changes in wage area definitions can have the long-term effect of increasing pay for Federal employees in affected locations. OPM expects this proposed rule will have no impact on approximately 69 NAF FWS employees. OPM does not anticipate this proposed rule will substantially impact local economies or have a large impact in local labor markets. However, OPM is requesting comment in this proposed rule regarding the impact. As this and future wage area changes may impact higher volumes of employees in geographical areas and could rise to the level of impacting local labor markets, OPM will continue to study the implications of such impacts in this or future rules as needed.

Regulatory Review

89 FR 36720OPM has examined the impact of this rulemaking as required by Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094, which direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). OMB has determined that this rulemaking is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

89 FR 36720The Director of OPM certifies that this rulemaking will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Federalism

89 FR 36720OPM has examined this rulemaking in accordance with Executive Order 13132, Federalism, and has determined that this proposed rule will not have any negative impact on the rights, roles and responsibilities of state, local, or tribal governments.

Civil Justice Reform

89 FR 36720This rulemaking meets the applicable standard set forth in Executive Order 12988.

Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995

89 FR 36720This rulemaking will not result in the expenditure by state, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any year, and it will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

89 FR 36721This rulemaking does not impose any reporting or recordkeeping requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.

List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 532

89 FR 36721Administrative practice and procedure, Freedom of information, Government employees, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Wages. Office Of Personnel Management. Accordingly, OPM is proposing to amend 5 CFR part 532 as follows:

PART 532—PREVAILING RATE SYSTEMS

89 FR 367211. The authority citation for part 532 continues to read as follows:

Authority

89 FR 367215 U.S.C. 5343, 5346; § 532.707 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552. 2. In appendix D to subpart B, amend the table by revising the wage area listing for the State of Colorado to read as follows:

Appendix D to Subpart B of Part 532—Nonappropriated Fund Wage and Survey Areas

89 FR 36721Definitions of Wage Areas and Wage Area Survey Areas * * * * * COLORADO Arapahoe Survey Area Colorado: Arapahoe Area of Application. Survey area plus: Colorado: Mesa El Paso Survey Area Colorado: El Paso Area of Application. Survey area plus: Colorado: Bent Otero Pueblo * * * * *

About

Type
Proposed rule
Citation
89 FR 36720
Published
2024-05-03
Action
Proposed rule.
Docket
Docket ID: OPM-2024-0010
Comments closed
2024-06-03

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is proposing a rule to remove Denver County, CO, from the Arapahoe-Denver, CO, nonappropriated fund (NAF) Federal Wage System (FWS) wage area. In addition, OPM proposes to change the name of the Arapahoe-Denver NAF FWS wage area to Arapahoe. These changes are necessary because no NAF FWS employment has been reported in Denver County since 2018.

Cites