PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Post Office, and the District of Columbia.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 3, 2009
Non-Foreign Area Retirement Equity Assurance Act of 2009 or the Non-Foreign AREA Act of 2009 - Revises federal employee locality-based comparability payments provisions to include U.S. territories and possessions, including the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, within a pay locality. Sets forth maximum rates of pay for Senior Executive Service (SES) personnel in such areas.
Revises the calculation of allowances based on living costs and conditions of environment for pay of employees stationed outside the continental United States or in Alaska to apply it only to areas designated as of December 31, 2009. Provides a formula for adjustment of such rate using a transition schedule for calendar years 2010-2012.
Requires adjustment of special rates of pay determined to be necessary to obtain or retain the services of persons specified by statute in such a cost-of-living area in accordance with regulations to be prescribed by the Director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) under this Act. Allows a temporarily raised limitation on the amount of special rates during the transition period of January 1, 2010, to January 1, 2012.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Expresses the sense of the Congress with respect to pay disparities and locality areas for federal positions located in Alaska, Hawaii, or a U.S. territory.
Defines "covered employees" for purposes of this Act, including employees who were eligible, before enactment, to be paid a cost-of-living allowance (COLA) but not a locality-based comparability payment. Describes application of this Act to postal employees.
Allows an employee subject to this Act's transition schedule who retires from service during the period from January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2012, to elect to have any COLA paid during that period considered as basic pay for purposes of annuity computation.
People & committees
Rep. Abercrombie, Neil [D-HI-1] · D–HI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Post Office, and the District of Columbia.
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1266 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1266 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1266 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1266 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.