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.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

12280 

Vol. 74, No. 55 

Tuesday, March 24, 2009 

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL 

MANAGEMENT 

5 CFR Part 532 

RIN 3206–AL83 

Prevailing Rate Systems; Redefinition 

of the New Haven-Hartford and New 

London, CT, Appropriated Fund 

Federal Wage System Wage Areas 

AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel 

Management. 

ACTION: Proposed rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Office of Personnel 

Management (OPM) is issuing a 

proposed rule that would define the 

New Haven-Hartford and New London, 

CT, appropriated fund Federal Wage 

System (FWS) wage areas by county 

rather than by city and town 

boundaries. Defining the New England 

FWS wage areas by primarily 

considering county boundaries would 

provide greater consistency in how 

OPM defines FWS wage areas and 

would improve the ability to make 

direct data comparisons with Census 

Bureau data. The proposed rule would 

define the New Haven-Hartford wage 

area to include Hartford and New Haven 

Counties, CT, as the survey area and 

Fairfield, Litchfield, Middlesex, and 

Tolland Counties, CT, as the area of 

application and the New London wage 

area to include New London County, 

CT, as the survey area and Windham 

County, CT, as the area of application. 

DATES: We must receive comments on or 

before April 23, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments 

to Charles D. Grimes III, Deputy 

Associate Director for Performance and 

Pay Systems, Strategic Human 

Resources Policy Division, U.S. Office of 

Personnel Management, Room 7H31, 

1900 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20415–8200; e-mail pay-performancepolicy@opm.gov; or FAX: (202) 606– 

4264. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Madeline Gonzalez, (202) 606–2838; email pay-performance-policy@opm.gov; 

or FAX: (202) 606–4264. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. 

Office of Personnel Management (OPM) 

is engaged in an ongoing project to 

review the geographic definitions of 

Federal Wage System (FWS) wage areas. 

OPM considers the following regulatory 

criteria under 5 CFR 532.211 when 

defining FWS wage area boundaries: 

(i) Distance, transportation facilities, 

and geographic features; 

(ii) Commuting patterns; and 

(iii) Similarities in overall population, 

employment, and the kinds and sizes of 

private industrial establishments. 

FWS wage areas in New England 

differ from the majority of FWS wage 

areas in that they are geographically 

defined according to the boundaries of 

cities and towns rather than by the 

boundaries of counties. Under its 

methodology for defining metropolitan 

areas, the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) uses counties rather than 

cities and towns as the primary 

geographic entities for defining 

metropolitan areas in New England. 

OMB uses cities and towns in New 

England to define a secondary set of 

metropolitan areas. Because OMB 

considers its county-based metropolitan 

areas the primary set of metropolitan 

areas for New England, we propose to 

primarily apply the county-based 

metropolitan area definitions to FWS 

wage area boundaries. Defining the New 

England FWS wage areas by primarily 

considering county boundaries will 

provide greater consistency in how the 

OPM defines FWS wage areas and will 

improve the ability to make direct data 

comparisons with Census Bureau data. 

For example, some statistical programs, 

such as the Census Bureau’s County 

Business Patterns, provide data by 

counties. 

OPM recently completed reviews of 

the definitions of the New HavenHartford and New London, CT, wage 

areas and, based on analyses of the 

regulatory criteria for defining wage 

areas, is proposing the changes 

described below. 

New Haven-Hartford, CT 

This proposed rule would define the 

New Haven-Hartford, CT, appropriated 

fund FWS wage area by county rather 

than by city and town boundaries. The 

proposed rule would define the New 

Haven-Hartford wage area to include 

Hartford and New Haven Counties, CT, 

as the survey area and Fairfield, 

Litchfield, Middlesex, and Tolland 

Counties, CT, as the area of application. 

The New Haven-Hartford survey area 

currently includes 1 town of Fairfield 

County, 15 towns of Hartford County, 2 

towns of Middlesex County, and 11 

towns of New Haven County. We 

propose that the New Haven-Hartford 

survey area be changed to include all of 

Hartford and New Haven Counties. The 

survey area would be conveniently 

located in the central part of the wage 

area and would closely reflect the 

prevailing rates paid by businesses in 

the wage area. Stratford town in 

Fairfield County and Cromwell and 

Middlefield towns in Middlesex 

County, currently part of the New 

Haven-Hartford survey area, would be 

redefined to the New Haven-Hartford 

area of application. 

Hartford, Middlesex, and Tolland 

Counties comprise the Hartford-West 

Hartford-East Hartford, CT Metropolitan 

Statistical Area (MSA). Old Saybrook 

town in Middlesex County is part of the 

current New London wage area. Somers 

and Somersville towns in Tolland 

County are part of the current Central 

and Western Massachusetts wage area. 

OPM regulations at 5 CFR 532.211 do 

not permit splitting MSAs for the 

purpose of defining a wage area, except 

in very unusual circumstances (e.g., 

organizational relationships among 

closely located Federal activities). OPM 

proposes to redefine Old Saybrook town 

in Middlesex County and Somers and 

Somersville towns in Tolland County to 

the New Haven-Hartford area of 

application so that the entire HartfordWest Hartford-East Hartford, CT MSA is 

in one wage area. No FWS employees 

currently work in Middlesex or Tolland 

Counties. With these changes, the New 

Haven-Hartford area of application 

would include all of Fairfield, 

Litchfield, Middlesex, and Tolland 

Counties. 

These changes would be effective for 

the full-scale wage survey in the New 

Haven-Hartford wage area scheduled to 

begin in April 2011. 

New London, CT 

This proposed rule would define the 

New London, CT, appropriated fund 

FWS wage area by county rather than by 

city and town boundaries. The proposed 

rule would define the New London 

wage area to include New London 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 24, 2009 / Proposed Rules 12281 

County, CT, as the survey area and 

Windham County, CT, as the area of 

application. 

The New London survey area 

currently includes 28 towns of New 

London County, CT, 1 town of 

Middlesex County, CT, and 2 towns of 

Washington County, RI. We propose 

that the New London survey area be 

changed to include all of New London 

County. 

OPM regulations at 5 CFR 532.211 do 

not permit splitting Metropolitan 

Statistical Areas (MSAs) for the purpose 

of defining a wage area, except in very 

unusual circumstances (e.g., 

organizational relationships among 

closely located Federal activities). OPM 

proposes to redefine Old Saybrook town 

in Middlesex County, currently part of 

the New London survey area, to the 

New Haven-Hartford area of application 

so the entire Hartford-West HartfordEast Hartford, CT MSA is in one wage 

area. No FWS employees currently work 

in Middlesex County. OPM proposes to 

redefine Hopkinton and Westerly towns 

in Washington County, currently part of 

the New London survey area, to the 

Narragansett Bay, RI, area of application 

so the entire Providence-New BedfordFall River, RI-MA MSA is in one wage 

area. No FWS employees currently work 

in Hopkinton and Westerly towns. 

These changes would be effective for 

the full-scale wage survey in the New 

London wage area scheduled to begin in 

September 2010. 

The Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory 

Committee (FPRAC), the national labormanagement committee that advises 

OPM on FWS pay matters, reviewed and 

recommended these changes by 

consensus. Based on its review of the 

regulatory criteria for defining FWS 

wage areas, FPRAC recommended no 

other changes in the geographic 

definitions of the New Haven-Hartford 

and New London wage areas. 

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. 

U.S. Office of Personnel Management. 

Kathie Ann Whipple, 

Acting Director. 

Accordingly, the U.S. Office of 

Personnel Management is proposing to 

amend 5 CFR part 532 as follows: 

PART 532—PREVAILING RATE 

SYSTEMS 

1. The authority citation for part 532 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5343, 5346; § 532.707 

also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552. 

2. In appendix C to subpart B, the 

wage area listing for the State of 

Connecticut is amended by revising the 

listings for New Haven-Hartford and 

New London; for the State of 

Massachusetts, by revising the listing for 

Central and Western Massachusetts; and 

for the State of Rhode Island, by revising 

the listing for Narragansett Bay, to read 

as follows: 

Appendix C to Subpart B of Part 532— 

Appropriated Fund Wage and Survey 

Areas 

* * * * * 

CONNECTICUT 

New Haven-Hartford 

Survey Area 

Connecticut: 

Hartford 

New Haven 

Area of Application. Survey area plus: 

Connecticut: 

Fairfield 

Litchfield 

Middlesex 

Tolland 

New London 

Survey Area 

Connecticut: 

New London 

Area of Application. Survey area plus: 

Connecticut: 

Windham 

*****

MASSACHUSETTS 

*****

Central and Western Massachusetts 

Survey Area 

Massachusetts: 

The following cities and towns in: 

Hampden County 

Agawam 

Chicopee 

East Longmeadow 

Feeding Hills 

Hampden 

Holyoke 

Longmeadow 

Ludlow 

Monson 

Palmer 

Southwick 

Springfield 

Three Rivers 

Westfield 

West Springfield 

Wilbraham 

Hampshire County 

Easthampton 

Granby 

Hadley 

Northampton 

South Hadley 

Worcester County 

Warren 

West Warren 

Area of Application. Survey area plus: 

Massachusetts: 

Berkshire 

Franklin 

Worcester (except Blackstone and Millville) 

The following cities and towns in: 

Hampshire County 

Amherst 

Belchertown 

Chesterfield 

Cummington 

Goshen 

Hatfield 

Huntington 

Middlefield 

Pelham 

Plainfield 

Southampton 

Ware 

Westhampton 

Williamsburg 

Worthington 

Hampden County 

Blandford 

Brimfield 

Chester 

Granville 

Holland 

Montgomery 

Russell 

Tolland 

Wales 

Middlesex County 

Ashby 

Shirley 

Townsend 

New Hampshire: 

Belknap 

Carroll 

Cheshire 

Grafton 

Hillsborough 

Merrimack 

Sullivan 

Vermont: 

Addison 

Bennington 

Caledonia 

Essex 

Lamoille 

Orange 

Orleans 

Rutland 

Washington 

Windham 

Windsor 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS

12282 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 24, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

1Staff Report on Commodity Swap Dealers and 

Index Traders with Commission Recommendations, 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 

September 2008, at 6. 

*****

RHODE ISLAND 

Narragansett Bay 

Survey Area 

Rhode Island: 

Bristol 

Newport 

The following cities and towns: 

Kent County 

Anthony 

Coventry 

East Greenwich 

Greene 

Warwick 

West Warwick 

Providence County 

Ashton 

Burrillville 

Central Falls 

Cranston 

Cumberland 

Cumberland Hill 

East Providence 

Esmond 

Forestdale 

Greenville 

Harrisville 

Johnston 

Lincoln 

Manville 

Mapleville 

North Providence 

North Smithfield 

Oakland 

Pascoag 

Pawtucket 

Providence 

Saylesville 

Slatersville 

Smithfield 

Valley Falls 

Wallum Lake 

Woonsocket 

Washington County 

Davisville 

Galilee 

Lafayette 

Narragansett 

North Kingstown 

Point Judith 

Quonset Point 

Saunderstown 

Slocum 

Massachusetts: 

The following cities and towns: 

Bristol County 

Attleboro 

Fall River 

North Attleboro 

Rehoboth 

Seekonk 

Somerset 

Swansea 

Westport 

Norfolk County 

Caryville 

Plainville 

South Bellingham 

Worcester County 

Blackstone 

Millville 

Area of Application. Survey area plus: 

Rhode Island: 

The following cities and towns in: 

Kent County 

West Greenwich 

Providence County 

Foster 

Glocester 

Scituate 

Washington County 

Charlestown 

Exeter 

Hopkinton 

New Shoreham 

Richmond 

South Kingstown 

Westerly 

Massachusetts: 

The following cities and towns in: 

Bristol County 

Acushnet 

Berkley 

Dartmouth 

Dighton 

Fairhaven 

Freetown 

Mansfield 

New Bedford 

Norton 

Raynham 

Taunton 

*****

[FR Doc. E9–6364 Filed 3–23–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6325–39–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Part 150 

RIN 3038–AC40 

Concept Release on Whether To 

Eliminate the Bona Fide Hedge 

Exemption for Certain Swap Dealers 

and Create a New Limited Risk 

Management Exemption From 

Speculative Position Limits 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking; request for public 

comment. 

SUMMARY: In June and July of 2008, the 

Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission (’’Commission’’) issued a 

special call for information from swap 

dealers and index traders regarding their 

over-the-counter (‘‘OTC’’) market 

activities. In September of 2008, the 

Commission released a ‘‘Staff Report on 

Commodity Swap Dealers and Index 

Traders with Commission 

Recommendations’’ (the ‘‘September 

2008 Report’’) with several preliminary 

Commission recommendations. 

Recommendation five of the September 

2008 Report directs the staff to develop 

an advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking that would review whether 

to eliminate the bona fide hedge 

exemption for swap dealers and replace 

it with a limited risk management 

exemption that is conditioned upon, 

among other things, an obligation to 

report to the CFTC and applicable selfregulatory organizations when certain 

noncommercial swap clients reach a 

certain position level and/or a 

certification that none of a swap dealer’s 

noncommercial swap clients exceed 

specified position limits in related 

exchange-regulated commodities.1

This concept release reviews the 

underlying statutory and regulatory 

background, as well as the regulatory 

history and relevant marketplace 

developments, as described in the 

September 2008 Report, which led to 

the foregoing recommendation. It then 

poses a number of questions designed to 

help inform the Commission’s decision 

as to whether to proceed with the 

recommendation to eliminate the bona 

fide hedge exemption for swap dealers 

and replace it with a conditional limited 

risk management exemption; and if so, 

what form the new limited risk 

management exemptive rules should 

take and how they might be 

implemented most effectively. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 26, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Comments should be 

submitted to David Stawick, Secretary, 

Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 

1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20581. Comments also may be sent by 

facsimile to (202) 418–5521, or by 

electronic mail to secretary@cftc.gov. 

Reference should be made to ‘‘Whether 

to Eliminate the Bona Fide Hedge 

Exemption for Certain Swap Dealers and 

Create a New Limited Risk Management 

Exemption from Speculative Position 

Limits.’’ Comments may also be 

submitted by connecting to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at http:// 

www.regulations.gov and following 

comment submission instructions. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Donald Heitman, Senior Special 

Counsel, Division of Market Oversight, 

Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 

1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20581, telephone (202) 418–5041, 

facsimile number (202) 418–5507, 

electronic mail dheitman@cftc.gov. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS