I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4901 

To amend the Federal Law Enforcement Pay Reform Act of 1990 to adjust 

the percentage differentials payable to Federal law enforcement officers 

in certain high-cost areas, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 19, 2007 

Mr. KING of New York (for himself, Mr. LATOURETTE, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. 

TURNER, Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida, Mrs. MALONEY of New 

York, Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey, Mr. BAIRD, Mr. FOSSELLA, Mrs. 

MCCARTHY of New York, Mr. FERGUSON, Mr. ACKERMAN, Mr. ISSA, Mr. 

UDALL of New Mexico, Mr. MCHUGH, Mr. HASTINGS of Florida, Mr. 

STUPAK, Mrs. BIGGERT, Mr. MCNULTY, Mr. LOBIONDO, Mr. PAYNE, 

Mr. BAKER, Mr. CASTLE, Mr. PASTOR, Mrs. CAPITO, Mr. KILDEE, Mr. 

SESSIONS, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Mr. HOLT, Mr. ALLEN, Mrs. LOWEY, Mr. 

RADANOVICH, Mr. ROTHMAN, Mr. BISHOP of Georgia, Mr. KUCINICH, 

Mr. SHAYS, Mr. RYAN of Ohio, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Mr. GARY G. MILLER

of California, Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas, Mr. PLATTS, Mr. DOYLE, Mr. 

WOLF, Mr. CLAY, and Mr. RUPPERSBERGER) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government 

Reform 

A BILL 

To amend the Federal Law Enforcement Pay Reform Act 

of 1990 to adjust the percentage differentials payable 

to Federal law enforcement officers in certain high-cost 

areas, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HR 4901 IH

1 SECTION 1. ADJUSTED DIFFERENTIALS. 

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 404(b) 

3 of the Federal Law Enforcement Pay Reform Act of 1990 

4 (5 U.S.C. 5305 note) is amended by striking the matter 

5 after ‘‘follows:’’ and inserting the following: 

‘‘Area Differential 

Atlanta Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area .................... 16.82%

Boston-Worcester-Lawrence, MA–NH–ME–CT–RI Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ......................................... 24.42%

Chicago-Gary-Kenosha, IL–IN–WI Consolidated Metropolitan 

Statistical Area ........................................................................ 25.68%

Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH–KY–IN Consolidated Metropolitan 

Statistical Area ........................................................................ 21.47%

Cleveland Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ................ 17.83%

Columbus Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ................ 16.90%

Dallas Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ...................... 18.51%

Dayton Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area .................... 15.97%

Denver-Boulder-Greeley, CO Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area .................................................................................. 22.78%

Detroit-Ann Arbor-Flint, MI Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area .................................................................................. 25.61%

Hartford, CT Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area .......... 24.47%

Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX Consolidated Metropolitan 

Statistical Area ........................................................................ 30.39%

Huntsville Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ............... 13.29%

Indianapolis Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ............ 13.38%

Kansas City Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ............ 14.11%

Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ............................................................ 27.25%

Miami-Fort Lauderdale, FL Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area .................................................................................. 21.75%

Milwaukee Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ............... 17.45%

Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN–WI Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area .............................................................................. 20.27%

New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY–NJ–CT–PA 

Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ............................. 27.17%

Orlando, FL Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ........... 14.22%

Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA–NJ–DE–MD Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ................................... 21.03%

Pittsburgh Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ............... 14.89%

Portland-Salem, OR–WA Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical 

Area .......................................................................................... 20.96%

Richmond Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ................ 16.46%

Sacramento-Yolo, CA Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical 

Area .......................................................................................... 20.77%

San Diego, CA Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ........ 22.13%

San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area .................................................................. 32.98%


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
3 

•HR 4901 IH

‘‘Area Differential 

Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton, WA Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area .............................................................................. 21.18%

St. Louis Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ................. 14.69%

Washington-Baltimore, DC–MD–VA–WV Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ............................................................ 19.48%

Rest of United States Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical 

Area .......................................................................................... 14.19%’’. 

1 (b) SPECIAL RULES.—For purposes of the provision 

2 of law amended by subsection (a)— 

3 (1) the counties of Providence, Kent, Wash4 ington, Bristol, and Newport, RI, the counties of 

5 York and Cumberland, ME, and the city of Concord, 

6 NH, shall be treated as if located in the Boston7 Worcester-Lawrence, MA–NH–ME–CT–RI Consoli8 dated Metropolitan Statistical Area; and 

9 (2) members of the Capitol Police shall be con10 sidered to be law enforcement officers within the 

11 meaning of section 402 of the Federal Law Enforce12 ment Pay Reform Act of 1990. 

13 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

14 subsection (a)— 

15 (1) shall take effect as if included in the Fed16 eral Law Enforcement Pay Reform Act of 1990 on 

17 the date of the enactment of such Act; and 

18 (2) shall be effective only with respect to pay 

19 for service performed in pay periods beginning on or 

20 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
4 

•HR 4901 IH

1 Subsection (b) shall be applied in a manner consistent 

2 with the preceding sentence. 

3 SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON PREMIUM PAY. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 5547 of title 5, United 

5 States Code, is amended— 

6 (1) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘5545a,’’; 

7 (2) in subsection (c), by striking ‘‘or 5545a’’; 

8 and 

9 (3) in subsection (d), by striking the period and 

10 inserting ‘‘or a criminal investigator who is paid 

11 availability pay under section 5545a.’’. 

12 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

13 this section shall take effect as if included in the enact14 ment of section 1114 of the National Defense Authoriza15 tion Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107–107; 115 

16 Stat. 1239). 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS