82 FR 22298 - Prevailing Rate Systems; Definition of Brown County, Wisconsin, and Forsyth and Mecklenburg Counties, North Carolina, to Nonappropriated Fund Federal Wage System Wage Areas
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 92 (May 15, 2017)
Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 92 (May 15, 2017)
| Page Range | 22298-22299 | |
| FR Document | 2017-09731 |
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 92 (Monday, May 15, 2017)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 22298-22299] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2017-09731] ======================================================================== 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. 82, No. 92 / Monday, May 15, 2017 / Proposed Rules [[Page 22298]] OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT 5 CFR Part 532 RIN 3206-AN50 Prevailing Rate Systems; Definition of Brown County, Wisconsin, and Forsyth and Mecklenburg Counties, North Carolina, to Nonappropriated Fund Federal Wage System Wage Areas AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel Management. ACTION: Proposed rule with request for comments. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: This rule proposes to amend the geographic boundaries of three nonappropriated fund (NAF) Federal Wage System (FWS) wage areas. Based on consensus recommendations of the Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee (FPRAC), the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) would define Brown County, Wisconsin, as an area of application county to the Lake, Illinois, NAF FWS wage area; Forsyth County, North Carolina, as an area of application to the Cumberland, NC, NAF FWS wage area; and Mecklenburg County, NC, as an area of application to the Richland, South Carolina, NAF FWS wage area. These changes are necessary because there are NAF FWS employees working in these three counties, and the counties are not currently defined in regulation to NAF wage areas. DATES: We must receive comments on or before June 14, 2017. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 3206-AN50, using any of the following methods: Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Mail: Brenda L. Roberts, Deputy Associate Director for Pay and Leave, Employee Services, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Room 7H31, 1900 E Street NW., Washington, DC 20415-8200. Email: [email protected]. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madeline Gonzalez, by telephone at (202) 606-2838 or by email at [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OPM is issuing a proposed rule that would make changes to three NAF FWS wage area definitions. The Department of Veterans Affairs notified OPM that the Veterans Canteen Service (VCS) now employs NAF FWS employees in Brown County, WI, and Forsyth and Mecklenburg Counties, NC. Under Sec. 532.219 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), each NAF wage area ``shall consist of one or more survey areas, along with nonsurvey areas, if any, having nonappropriated fund employees.'' Brown, Forsyth, and Mecklenburg Counties do not meet the regulatory criteria under 5 CFR 532.219 to be established as separate NAF wage areas; however, nonsurvey counties may be combined with a survey area to form a wage area. Section 532.219 lists the regulatory criteria that OPM considers when defining FWS wage area boundaries: (i) Proximity of largest facilities activity in each county; (ii) Transportation facilities and commuting patterns; and (iii) Similarities of the counties in-- (A) Overall population; (B) Private employment in major industry categories; and (C) Kinds and sizes of private industrial establishments. OPM recently completed reviews of the definitions of Brown, Forsyth, and Mecklenburg Counties and is proposing the changes described below. FPRAC, 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 apply on the first day of the first applicable pay period beginning on or after 30 days following publication of the final regulations. Brown County, WI Brown County would be defined as an area of application county to the Lake, IL, NAF FWS wage area. The closest NAF wage area to Brown County is the Lake wage area. The employment location of the new NAF FWS employees in Brown County (VCS #395) is located approximately 170 miles from Naval Station Great Lakes, the Lake wage area's host activity. With the definition of Brown County to the Lake NAF wage area, the Lake wage area would consist of one survey county, Lake County, IL, and nine area of application counties: Cook, Rock Island, and Vermilion Counties, IL; Johnson County, IA; Dickinson and Marquette Counties, MI; and Brown, Dane, and Milwaukee Counties, WI. Forsyth County, NC Forsyth County would be defined as an area of application county to the Cumberland, NC, NAF FWS wage area. The closest NAF wage area to Forsyth County is the Cumberland wage area. The employment location of the new NAF FWS employees in Forsyth County (VCS #359) is located approximately 103 miles from Fort Bragg, the Cumberland wage area's host activity. With the definition of Forsyth County to the Cumberland NAF wage area, the Cumberland wage area would consist of one survey county, Cumberland County, NC, and three area of application counties: Durham, Forsyth, and Rowan Counties, NC. Mecklenburg County, NC Mecklenburg County would be defined as an area of application county to the Richland, SC, NAF FWS wage area. The closest NAF wage area to Mecklenburg County is the Richland wage area. The employment location of the new NAF FWS employees in Mecklenburg County (VCS #959) is located approximately 91 miles from Fort Jackson, the Richland wage area's host activity. With the definition of Mecklenburg County to the Richland NAF wage area, the Richland wage area would consist of one survey county, Richland County, SC, and four area of application counties: Buncombe and Mecklenburg Counties, NC; Sumter County, SC; and Washington County, TN. 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 affect only Federal agencies and employees. List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 532 Administrative practice and procedure, Freedom of information, Government employees, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Wages. [[Page 22299]] U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Kathleen M. McGettigan, Acting Director. Accordingly, OPM is proposing to amend 5 CFR part 532 as follows: PART 532--PREVAILING RATE SYSTEMS 0 1. The authority citation for part 532 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5343, 5346; Sec. 532.707 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552. 0 2. Appendix D to Subpart B is amended by revising the wage area listing for the Lake, IL; Cumberland, NC; and Richland, SC, wage areas to read as follows: Appendix D to Subpart B of Part 532--Nonappropriated Fund Wage and Survey Areas * * * * * ILLINOIS Lake Survey Area Illinois: Lake Area of Application. Survey area plus: Illinois: Cook Rock Island Vermilion Iowa: Johnson Michigan: Dickinson Marquette Wisconsin: Brown Dane Milwaukee * * * * * NORTH CAROLINA * * * * * Cumberland Survey Area North Carolina: Cumberland Area of Application. Survey area plus: North Carolina: Durham Forsyth Rowan * * * * * SOUTH CAROLINA * * * * * Richland Survey Area South Carolina: Richland Area of Application. Survey area plus: North Carolina: Buncombe Mecklenburg South Carolina Sumter Tennessee Washington * * * * * [FR Doc. 2017-09731 Filed 5-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6325-39-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 92 / Monday, May 15, 2017 / Proposed Rules 22299
U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Sumter U.S.C. United States Code
Kathleen M. McGettigan, Tennessee
Washington II. Background, Purpose, and Legal
Acting Director. Basis
Accordingly, OPM is proposing to * * * * *
amend 5 CFR part 532 as follows: On April 4, 2017, Coast Guard Sector
[FR Doc. 2017–09731 Filed 5–12–17; 8:45 am]
Upper Mississippi River received an
BILLING CODE 6325–39–P
PART 532—PREVAILING RATE application for a marine event from
SYSTEMS International Outboard Grand Prix for
the Grand Prix of Omaha and Regatta
■ 1. The authority citation for part 532 DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Festival. The event is scheduled to take
continues to read as follows: SECURITY place over three days, July 7, 8, and 9,
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5343, 5346; § 532.707 2017, on the Missouri River between the
Coast Guard cities of Omaha, NE and Council Bluffs,
also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552.
■ 2. Appendix D to Subpart B is IA. High speed boat practices and races
33 CFR Part 165 will take place during the hours of 3 to
amended by revising the wage area
listing for the Lake, IL; Cumberland, NC; [Docket Number USCG–2017–0318] 5 p.m. on July 7, 11:30 a.m. to 6 p.m.
and Richland, SC, wage areas to read as on July 8, and 11 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on
RIN 1625–AA00
follows: July 9.
Safety Zone; Missouri River Miles 616– Hazards from this race include
Appendix D to Subpart B of Part 532—
617, Council Bluffs, IA, and Omaha, NE impediment of the navigational channel
Nonappropriated Fund Wage and
Survey Areas and high speed vessels participating in
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
the race. The Captain of the Port Upper
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. Mississippi River (COTP) has
* * * * * SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to determined that potential hazards
ILLINOIS establish a safety zone on the Missouri associated with the race would be a
Lake River between miles 616 and 617. This safety concern for anyone transiting
Survey Area action is necessary to provide for the through the race course.
Illinois: safety of life on these navigable waters The purpose of this proposed
Lake near Council Bluffs, IA and Omaha, NE rulemaking is to ensure the safety of
Area of Application. Survey area plus: during high speed boat races on July 7, vessels and the navigable waters
Illinois: between miles 616 and 617 before,
8, and 9, 2017. This proposed
Cook
Rock Island rulemaking would prohibit persons and during, and after the scheduled event.
Vermilion vessels from being in the safety zone The Coast Guard proposes this proposed
Iowa: unless authorized by the Captain of the rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C.
Johnson Port Upper Mississippi River or a 1231.
Michigan: designated representative. We invite III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
Dickinson your comments on this proposed
Marquette rulemaking. The COTP proposes to establish a
Wisconsin:
Brown DATES: Comments and related material safety zone from 3 p.m. on July 7, 2017
Dane must be received by the Coast Guard on through 5.30 p.m. on July 9, 2017. The
Milwaukee or before June 14, 2017. zone would be enforced from 3 to 5 p.m.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on July 7, 2017, 11:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. on
* * * * * identified by docket number USCG– July 8, 2017, and 11 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
NORTH CAROLINA on July 9, 2017. The safety zone would
2017–0318 using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http:// cover all navigable waters between
* * * * * miles 616 and 617 on the Missouri River
Cumberland www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public
Participation and Request for in Council Bluffs, IA and Omaha, NE.
Survey Area The duration of the zone is intended to
Comments’’ portion of the
North Carolina: ensure the safety of vessels and
Cumberland SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
further instructions on submitting participants on the navigable waters
Area of Application. Survey area plus: before, during, and after the scheduled
North Carolina: comments.
Durham
high speed boat practices and races. No
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If vessel or person would be permitted to
Forsyth
you have questions about this proposed enter the safety zone without obtaining
Rowan
rulemaking, call or email LCDR Sean permission from the COTP or a
* * * * * Peterson, Chief of Prevention, U.S. Coast designated representative. The
SOUTH CAROLINA Guard; telephone 314–269–2332, email regulatory text we are proposing appears
Sean.M.Peterson@uscg.mil. at the end of this document.
* * * * * SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Richland IV. Regulatory Analyses
Survey Area I. Table of Abbreviations
We developed this proposed rule after
South Carolina: CFR Code of Federal Regulations considering numerous statutes and
Richland COTP Captain of the Port Upper
Area of Application. Survey area plus: Mississippi River
Executive Orders related to rulemaking.
North Carolina: DHS Department of Homeland Security Below we summarize our analyses
Buncombe FR Federal Register based on a number of these statutes and
Mecklenburg NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking Executive Orders and we discuss First
South Carolina § Section Amendment rights of protestors.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 12:44 May 12, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15MYP1.SGM 15MYP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_22390/page/2.svg)
Document Created: 2017-05-13 02:38:49
Document Modified: 2017-05-13 02:38:49
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Proposed rule with request for comments. | |
| Dates | We must receive comments on or before June 14, 2017. | |
| Contact | Madeline Gonzalez, by telephone at (202) 606-2838 or by email at [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 82 FR 22298 | |
| RIN Number | 3206-AN50 | |
| CFR Associated | Administrative Practice and Procedure; Freedom of Information; Government Employees; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Wages |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR