Information about http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2005/pdf/05-23359.pdf
71294 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 227 /…
Tags: 40 cfr, advisory council, advisory members, air compliance, board staff, board workshop, business science, compliance analysis, confidential business, environmental protection, federal register, information valuation, omb control numbers, protection decisions, recent developments, science advisory board, scientific advisory committee, staff office, valuation methods, workshop participants,Pages: 10
Language: english
Created: Fri Nov 25 22:01:59 2005
Display cached document
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
71294 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 227 / Monday, November 28, 2005 / Notices
reports of VAIP members is used by ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION convening this workshop to learn about
EPA to assess the success of the program AGENCY recent developments in ecological
in achieving its goals. The information valuation methods and better
[FRL80032]
contained in the annual reports may be understand the potential applications
considered confidential business Science Advisory Board Staff Office; and implications of these methods for
information and is maintained as such. Notification of a Science Advisory valuation programs at EPA. The
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, Board Workshop: Science for Workshop participants will include
and a person is not required to respond Valuation of EPA's Ecological advisory members of the SAB, the Clean
to, a collection of information unless it Protection Decisions and Programs Air Scientific Advisory Committee
displays a currently valid OMB control (CASAC), the Advisory Council on
number. The OMB control numbers for AGENCY: Environmental Protection Clean Air Compliance Analysis
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed Agency (EPA). (Council), their committees, and invited
in 40 CFR part 9. ACTION: Notice. EPA and outside experts in valuation of
ecological services.
Burden Statement: The annual public SUMMARY: The EPA Science Advisory A draft Workshop agenda is posted on
reporting and recordkeeping burden for Board (SAB) is conducting a workshop the SAB Web site under ``Recent
this collection of information is on Science for Valuation of EPA's Additions'' (http://www.epa.gov/sab/
estimated to average 98 hours per Ecological Protection Decisions and whatsnew.htm). An updated agenda will
response. Burden means the total time, Programs. The Workshop is open to be posted prior to the Workshop.
effort, or financial resources expended public observers, however, seating for Workshop Proceedings will be made
by persons to generate, maintain, retain, the public is limited and available on a available at a date to be announced on
or disclose or provide information to or first-come basis to those who pre- the SAB Web site.
for a Federal agency. This includes the register (see Workshop Registration Accessibility: For information on
time needed to review instructions; Instructions, below). access or services for individuals with
develop, acquire, install, and utilize DATES: The SAB Workshop will be held disabilities, please contact Ms. Marie
technology and systems for the purposes on Tuesday, December 13, 2005, from 9 Gernes at 2023439975 or
of collecting, validating, and verifying a.m. until 6 p.m., and from 8:30 a.m. gernes.marie@epa.gov. To request
information, processing and until 12 p.m. on Wednesday, December accommodation of a disability, please
maintaining information, and disclosing 14, 2005. contact Ms. Gernes, preferably at least
and providing information; adjust the ADDRESSES: The SAB Workshop will be ten days prior to the workshop, to give
existing ways to comply with any held at the Ronald Reagan Building, EPA as much time as possible to process
previously applicable instructions and 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., your request.
requirements; train personnel to be able Washington, DC 20004. Dated: November 18, 2005.
to respond to a collection of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any Vanessa Vu,
information; search data sources; member of the public wishing further Director, EPA Science Advisory Board Staff
complete and review the collection of information concerning this workshop Office.
information; and transmit or otherwise should contact Ms. Marie Gernes, EPA [FR Doc. E56582 Filed 112505; 8:45 am]
disclose the information. Science Advisory Board Staff Office BILLING CODE 656050P
Respondents/Affected Entities: (1400F), U.S. Environmental Protection
Primary Production of Aluminum. Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone
Estimated Number of Respondents: 7. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
(202) 3439975; Fax (202) 2330643; or
Frequency of Response: Annually. COMMISSION
via e-mail at gernes.marie@epa.gov.
Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: General information about the EPA Agency Information Collection
689. Science Advisory Board may be found Activities: Notice of Submission for
on the SAB Web site (http:// OMB Review; Final Comment Request
Estimated Total Annual Cost:
www.epa.gov/sab).
$51,478, which includes $0 annualized Workshop Registration Instructions: AGENCY: Equal Employment
capital/startup costs, $0 annual O&M Members of the public wishing to Opportunity Commission.
costs, and $51,478 annual labor costs. observe the Workshop must pre-register ACTION: Final notice of submission for
Changes in the Estimates: There is an no later than 12 noon Eastern Time on OMB review.
increase of 105 hours in the total Monday, December 5, 2005. Please pre-
estimated burden currently identified in register via e-mail or fax to Ms. Marie SUMMARY: In accordance with the
the OMB Inventory of Approved ICR Gernes (see above information), Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
Burdens. This increase is due to providing your name, title, organization, Equal Employment Opportunity
additional incremental effort to collect mailing address, phone and e-mail. Commission gives notice that it has
and report annual direct carbon dioxide SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The SAB submitted the information collection
(CO2) emissions data in addition to was established by 42 U.S.C. 4365 to described below to the Office of
perfluorocarbon (PFC) data. Direct CO2 provide independent scientific and Management and Budget.
emissions result from the consumption technical advice, consultation, and DATES: Written comments on this notice
of the carbon anode during the recommendations to the EPA must be submitted on or before
production of primary aluminum. Administrator on the technical basis for December 28, 2005.
Dated: November 16, 2005. Agency positions and regulations. The ADDRESSES: Comments on this notice
SAB Committee on Valuing the must be submitted to Carolyn Lovett,
Oscar Morales,
Protection of Ecological Systems and Policy Analyst, Office of Information
Director, Collection Strategies Division. Services (CVPESS) is undertaking a and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
[FR Doc. E56601 Filed 112505; 8:45 am] study to assess the current state of Management and Budget, 725 17th
BILLING CODE 656050P science in this area. The SAB is Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503,
VerDate Aug2005 15:28 Nov 25, 2005 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM 28NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 227 / Monday, November 28, 2005 / Notices 71295
e-mail Carolyn_Lovett@omb.eop.gov. Nine witnesses, representing some of accommodate changing demographics
Comments also should be submitted to the same parties, testified at the and the government-wide Revisions to
Stephen Llewellyn, Acting Executive Commission's public hearing held on the Standards for the Classification of
Officer, Executive Secretariat, Equal October 29, 2003, pursuant to section Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity; 4
Employment Opportunity Commission, 709(c) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and limiting the burden on employers.
10th Floor, 1801 L Street, NW., of 1964. The record was completed by The goal of the Commission was, of
Washington, DC 20507. The Acting several written comments submitted curse, to find the appropriate balance
Executive Officer will accept comments subsequent to the hearing. among these competing factors.
transmitted by facsmile (``FAX'') The race and ethnic categories
History and Uses of the EEO1
machine. The telephone number for the proposed in the EEOC's June 11, 2003
FAX receiver is (202) 6634114. (This is The EEOC and OFCCP, acting as the Notice differ from the current EEO1 in
not a toll-free-number). Only comments Joint Reporting committee, adopted the several respects. The revisions proposed
of six or fewer pages will be accepted EEO1 report in 1966 to collect annual in the June 11, 2003 Notice were as
via FAX transmittal. This limitation is data from many private employers and follows: (i) Add a new racial category
necessary to assure access to the federal contractors about their minority titled ``Two or more races''; (ii) separate
equipment. Receipt of FAX transmittals and female workforce. See 42 U.S.C ``Asians'' from ``Pacific Islanders''; (iii)
will not be acknowledged, except that 2000e8(c).2 The agencies planned to rename ``Black'' as ``Black or African
the sender may request confirmation of use these EEO1 data to analyze American''; (iv) rename ``Hispanic'' as
receipt by calling the Executive patterns of employment discrimination ``Hispanic or Latino''; and (v) strongly
Secretariat staff at (202) 6334070 and to support civil rights enforcement. encourage employers to use self-
(voice) or (202) 6634074 (TDD). (These See U.S. Equal Employment reporting rather than visual
are not toll-free-telephone numbers.) Opportunity commission, ``A History of identification. The public comments to
Copies of comments submitted by the the EEOC, 19651984.'' Both agencies the June 11, 2003 Notice primarily
public will be available for review at the have used the data for enforcement.3 focused on the Commission's strong
Commission's library, room 6502, 1801 OFCCP uses EEO1 data to determine endorsement of employee self-
L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20507 which employer facilities to select for identification; on its adoption of the
between the hours of 9:30 a.m. and 5 compliance evaluations. The EEOC also new racial category, ``Two or more
p.m. uses EEO1 data to analyze trends in races''; and on the guidance for counting
female and minority employment and reporting the number of Hispanic or
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
within companies, industries, regions,
Joachim Neckere, Director, Program Latino employees.
and sectors of the economy. See, e.g.,
Research and Surveys Division, 1801 L
``Women of Color: Their Employment in Self-Identification
Street, NW., Room 922, Washington, DC
the Private Sector'' (July 2003) at http:// The June 11, 2003 Notice proposed
20507; (202) 6634958 (voice) or (202)
www.eeoc.gov/stats/reports/ that employers gather data needed to
6637063 (TDD); or Carol Miaskoff,
womenofcolor. complete the revised EEO1 report by
Assistant Legal Counsel, 1801 L Street, The government's commitment to
NW., Washington, DC 20507; (202) 663 asking employees to voluntarily report
collecting and analyzing these
4637 (voice) or (202) 6637026 (TDD). their ethnicity and race. In the past,
workforce data is a concrete
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: employers usually determined ethnicity
demonstration of its ongoing
and race for the EEO1 by visual
Introduction commitment to full enforcement of Title
observation. The Commission's proposal
VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The
With this Notice, the Equal meant that, for the first time, employers
importance of EEO1 data in describing
Employment Opportunity Commission would be strongly encouraged to rely on
(EEOC or Commission) announces that the workforce in terms of the job
employee self-identification to identify
it is submitting to the Office of placement of minorities and women was
their ethnicity and race.
Management and Budget (OMB), a constant factor in the consideration of
A few public commenters were
pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction these revisions.
concerned about potential employee
As explained in its June 11, 2003
Act of 1995 (PRA), final revisions to the discomfort with racial and ethnic self-
Notice, the Commission initiated this
Employer Information Report (EEO1), identification, and one public
revision in light of several
after consultation with the Department commenter questioned the legality of
developments, including the revised
of Labor, Office of Federal Contract self-identification under Title VII of the
Compliance Programs (OFCCP). The 1997 government-wide standards for
Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended,
EEOC published the initial PRA Notice reporting race and ethnicity, see infra
(Title VII) and Executive Order 11246,
on June 11, 2003. See Agency note 5.
as amended. See Written Comments of
Information Collection Activities: Race and Ethnic Categories Affirmative Action Consulting; Written
Revision of the Employer Information In reaching final decisions on race Comments of Associated Industries of
Report (EEO1), 68 FR 34965, June 11, and ethnic categories for the revised the Inland Northwest. On practical
2003.1 In the initial notice, the EEOC EEO1 report, the EEOC was guided by grounds, an employer group raised the
proposed changes to the ethnic and the need to balance three competing question of whether self-identification
racial categories on the EEO1 report, interests: Obtaining data that will would be required if it were not
and also to the job categories. Thirty- support the EEOC and OFCCP in ``feasible'' for employers. The Equal
two interested parties submitted written Employment Advisory Council (EEAC)
enforcing Title VII and Executive Order
comments, including employers, civil maintained that employers should be
11246; modernizing the EEO1 to
rights organizations, human resources permitted to continue determining race
and information technology 2 See http://www.eeoc.gov/eeo1survey/ and ethnicity by visual observation if an
professionals, and other individuals. whomustfile.html (who must file EEO1).
3 See Testimony of Wade Henderson of the 4 Revisions to the Standards for the Classification
1 The proposed EEO1 Report form and the June Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (stating that of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity, 62 FR 58782,
11, 2003 Notice can be found at: http:// courts, private parties, and employers also have October 30, 1997 (hereinafter ``Revised Standards''
www.eeoc.gov/eeo1. found EEO1 data useful). or ``1997 Revised Standards'').
VerDate Aug2005 15:28 Nov 25, 2005 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM 28NON1
71296 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 227 / Monday, November 28, 2005 / Notices
employee declined to self-identify or in would require reporting of data about about Hispanic or Latino employees and
other undefined situations in which it the number of employees who identify stated that the EEOC could use OMB
was ``unduly burdensome or otherwise with. ``Two or more races,'' but would guidance to allocate data about
not practical or feasible'' to extend an not require reporting of the different individuals with multiracial
invitation to self-identify. See Written races with which these employees backgrounds into single groups as
Testimony for Hearing of Jeffrey A. identify. necessary. See Testimony of Marisa J.
Norris of EEAC. Some employers conditionally Demeo of MALDEF; Written Comments
The Commission reaffirms its position supported the ``Two or more races'' of MALDEF.
that self-identification is the preferred category on the EEO1, while also The Commission adopts the ``Two or
method for gathering ethnic and racial expressing concern about burden and more races'' category for the final EEO
information for the EEO1 Report. Self- inaccurate data. The Chamber of 1. Detailed reporting in separate racial
identification is key to the government's Commerce conditionally supported the combinations would, at the current
goal of understanding the increasing ``Two or more races'' category based on time, result only in a marginal
complexity of race in America. In the coordination with OFCCP's programs enhancement of the utility of EEO1
1990s, OMB recognized that a new under Executive Order 11246. See data for EEOC enforcement purposes. In
Federal system for reporting racial and Written Comments on the Chamber of the 2000 Census, 2.4% of respondents
ethnic data would need to reflect the Commerce. The Society for Human reported that they were in a category
increasing diversity of the Nation's Resources Management (SHRM), that would qualify as ``Two or more
population due to growth in however, argued that the Commission's races.'' See Testimony of Christopher
immigration and interracial marriage. proposal would yield misleading data, Northup. The 2.4% itself, includes
See Standards for the Classification of because the numbers for specific races several unique racial combinations;
Federal Data and Race and Ethnicity, 59 would be reduced due to the subtraction separate reporting for each racial
FR 29831, June 9, 1994. The Revised of those who identified as ``Two or more combination would result in even
Standards issued by OMB in 1997 called races,'' whereas the number of smaller numbers for each one,
for the enumeration of individuals with Hispanics or Latinos would not be depending on region. This marginal
a multiracial background in federal reduced in this way. See Testimony of enhancement of EEOO1 data does not
reports and stated that self- Cornelia Gamlem on behalf of SHRM; justify, at the current time, the added
identification was preferred. See Written of SHRM. Based on concerns burden for employers and for the
Revised Standards, supra note 5.5 The about burden, some employer government of detailed data collection
Commission agrees that self- representatives proposed retaining the and reporting. EEO1 data about
identification is necessary when Federal EEO1's current format of single race employees of ``Two or more races'' will
reports enumerate the racial and ethnic reporting. See Written Comments of be useful to the Commission to analyze
backgrounds of individuals. Bank One; Written Comments of Jackson national employment trends.
The Commission also is convinced and Associate Consulting; Written Another central factor in the adoption
that self-identification for the EEO1 Comments of Avista Corporation. Other of ``Two or more races'' is that it
report will not undermine civil rights. employer groups simply argued against supports OFCCP's use of EEO1 data.
Self-identification for EEO1 purposes detailed reporting schemes for multiple OFCCP's statistical model for selecting
is subject to safeguards, as described races. See e.g., Testimony of Jeffrey contractors for compliance reviews,
below. Legally, self-identification does Norris of EEAC; Written Comments of which is designed to target employer
not alter any of the fundamental legal EEAC; Testimony of H. Juanita M. facilities with the highest likelihood of
standards of Title VII and Executive Beecher of ORC Worldwide; Written systemic discrimination, uses
Order 11246, which prohibit unlawful Comments on ORC Worldwide. Finally, aggregated ``minority'' and
employment discrimination on the basis in light of the potential burden, one ``nonminority'' categories based on
of race and ethnicity, among other commenter questioned the utility of the EEO1 data. OFCCP's targeting system
bases. Employers are prohibited from category for ``Two or more races,'' requires that EEO1 data be reported in
using race or ethnic information to make noting that only a small number of a format that can be easily folded into
any employment decisions that would individuals who are currently in the this analysis. Adoption of the ``Two or
violate Title VII and Executive Order workforce self-identify with multiple more races'' category will allow OFCCP
11246. races, based on 200 Census Data. See to count this new category as
Employers may use employment Testimony of Christopher Northup. ``minority'' and to continue using the
records or visual observation to gather By contrast, civil rights groups urged current methodology with minor
race and ethnic data for EEO1 purposes the Commission to adopt more detailed adjustments.
only when employees decline to self- racial reporting, in the interests of civil The Commission intends, however, to
identify. rights enforcement and full compliance turn to its own database of Title VII
with OMB's Revised Standards. the charges to identify and study those
New Race Category: Two or More Races Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, concerned charges in which employment
In its June 11, 2003 proposal, the about the advancement of people of discrimination on the basis of more than
Commission said that the EEO1 report color, observed that the category of one race is alleged. For example, the
``Two or more races'' would not be EEOC can determine the number of
5 See also Standards for the Classification of meaningful for affirmative action charges filed on the basis of more than
Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity, 59 FR 29831, purposes under OFCCP's authority. See one race, and also identify the most
June 9, 1994 (announcing OMB's decision to review Written Testimony for Hearing of Rev. common racial combinations on which
the government-wide racial and ethnic categories
and indicating that one of the general principles
Jesse L. Jackson, Jr., of the Rainbow/ discrimination charges are filed, as well
guiding this review would be respect for individual PUSH Coalition (read into Hearing as the types of discrimination most
dignity and the corresponding need to facilitate Record by Mark Long). The Mexican often alleged by individuals with these
self-identification to the greatest extent possible); American Legal Defense and multiracial backgrounds. When
Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on
Race and Ethnicity, 60 FR 44674, 44679 August 28,
Educational Fund (MALDEF) considered in conjunction with the
1995 (discussing the pros and cons of self- emphasized the importance for EEO revised EEO1 data on ``Two or More
identification). purposes of reporting full racial data Races,'' such analysis of the EEOC's
VerDate Aug2005 15:28 Nov 25, 2005 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM 28NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 227 / Monday, November 28, 2005 / Notices 71297
charge database will help the ethnicity and race as a reasonable about how to explain the two-question
Commission determine whether future balance between governmental and format to employees. Finally, after the
changes in the EEO1 are needed. private interests, based on its October 2003 public hearing, employer
understanding that employers would groups urged the Commission to keep a
Reporting Racial Data for Hispanics or
not be required to report and analyze all ``combined'' format for the EEO1, so
Latinos
ethnic and racial combinations. See that employers would only need to ask
The Commission's June 11, 2003 Testimony of Kris Meade on behalf of one question of employees: With which
proposal did not require employers to the Chamber of Commerce. The EEAC race/ethnicity do you primarily
report racial data for Hispanic or Latino concurred with this view. See
employees on the revised EEO1. In identify? See Supplemental
Testimony of Jeffrey Norris of EEAC;
written comments and in testimony, Submissions of National Industry
Written Comments of EEAC.
civil rights groups urged the EEOC to The Commission reaffirms its Liaison Group, ORC Worldwide, and
change its positions and require decision not to require employers to EEAC. See also Revised Standards, 62
employers to report the race of Hispanic report the race of employees who FR 58789 (discussing ``combined''
or Latino employees. MALDEF asserted identify as Hispanic or Latino. For format).
the importance of reporting full racial purposes of its own uses of EEO1 data, The Commission retains the two-
data about Hispanic or Latino the Commission notes that only a small question format because it has been
employees. Rainbow/PUSH agreed, percentage of the population 18 years of shown to yield more accurate data about
noting that persons of mixed heritage age and over chose to identify as both Hispanics or Latinos. This approach is
are more likely to face discrimination Hispanic and a racial minority group in part of a longstanding Federal effort to
because of their African ancestry than Census 2000.6 This suggests that obtain accurate ethnic data. In 1976, in
because of the other racial or ethnic requiring employers to report the race of response to an apparent under-count of
elements of their heritage. See Written Hispanic or Latino employees would Americans of Spanish origin or descent
Testimony for Hearing of Rev. Jesse L. not significantly improve the utility of
Jackson, Sr., of the Rainbow/PUSH in the 1970 Census, Congress passed
EEO1 data for enforcement purposes.
Coalition (read into Hearing Record by Pub. L. 94311 calling for the collection,
Moreover, such detailed data could not
Mark Long). The National Asian Pacific easily be folded into OFCCP's system for analysis, and publication of federal
American Legal Consortium (NAPALC) targeting contractors for compliance statistics on persons of Spanish origin or
expressed concern that failing to report review. Finally, some employers have descent. OMB issued the ``Race and
the racial breakdown of Hispanics or testified regarding the burden of Ethnic Standards for Federal Statistics
Latinos might artificially inflate data for collecting data about the race of and Administrative Reporting'' shortly
Latino employees while deflating data Hispanic or Latino employees. thereafter, adding Hispanic ethnicity to
for the racial groups. See Written Ultimately, on the EEO1 report itself, Federal reports and encouraging
Comments of NAPALC. ethnic and racial data are reported in separate reporting of race and
An employer group, SHRM, expressed the same fashion as before the revision; ethnicity.7 In a further effort to enhance
concern that failing to report the race of that is, for Hispanic or Latino accuracy, OMB's 1997 Revised
Hispanics or Latinos would result in employees, race data are not reported. Standards recommended that Federal
skewed EEO1 data. SHRM proposed forms ask two questions: the first about
that all employees, including Hispanics The Two-Question Format
ethnicity; and the second about race.
or Latinos, be asked to report the race There were many public comments
This decision stemmed, in part, from
or ethnicity with which they primarily about the Commission's June 11, 2003
research sponsored by the Bureau of
identify, and also be given the option of proposal to use the ``two-question
format'' to collect ethnic and racial data Labor Statistics showing that
choosing the ``Two or more races''
category. See Testimony of Cornelia from employees for the EEO1 report. significantly more people appropriately
Gamlem on behalf of SHRM; Written The ``two-question format'' means that identified as Hispanic or Latino when
Comments of SHRM. employees are first asked to report their they were asked separately about
The majority of employers, however, Hispanic or Latino status and second to Hispanic or Latino origin.8 The
focused on the burden to employers of report the race or races they consider Commission's decision to adopt a two-
collecting, maintaining, and reporting themselves to be. question format is part of this ongoing
race data about Hispanic or Latino There were several objections to the effort to design federal reports that yield
employees (as well as detailed race data ``two-question format'' as proposed. a more accurate count of Hispanics or
about employees who selected the ``Two Many commenters objected that the Latinos.9
or more races'' category). Several Commission had ``singled out''
companies pointed out that such Hispanics or Latinos for different 7 Statistical Policy Directive No. 15, ``Race and
detailed reporting would require a treatment. Some commenters criticized Ethnic Standards for Federal Statistics and
complete and burdensome overhaul of this proposal as an effort to inflate the Administrative Reporting,'' 43 FR 19269, May 4,
number of Hispanics or Latinos for 1978.
their Human Resources Information 8 See Recommendations from the Interagency
Systems. See Written Comments of political purposes. Other commenters, Committee for the Review of the Racial and Ethnic
Lozier Corporation; Written Comments mostly representatives of the Human Standards to the Office of Management and Budget
of ORC Worldwide; Written Comments Resources field, expressed concern Concerning Changes to the Standards for
of TOC (objecting to a ``mind-boggling'' Classifications of Federal Data on Race and
6 The Commission also notes that there is Ethnicity, 62 FR 36874, July 9, 1997
number of possible combinations of data (Recommendations from the Interagency
uncertainty about whether Hispanics or Latinos
to report); Written Comments of SHRM willingly or accurately self-identify using American Committee) Appendix 2, Chapter 4.7.
(expressing concern about the burden of racial categories, when given the opportunity to do 9 See Standards for Classification of Federal Data
overhauling Human Resources so. See Overview of Race and Hispanic Origin: on Race and Ethnicity, 60 FR 44674, August 28,
Information Systems, in addition to its Census 2000 Brief, March 2001, page 10; see also, 1995, at 4467844679; see also Recommendations
Mireya Navarro, Going beyond Black and White, from the Interagency Committee, Appendix 2,
concerns about skewed data). The Hispanics in Census Pick `Other', The New York Chapter 4 (detailing various effects and data quality
Chamber of Commerce endorsed the Times, November 9, 2003, § 1 (New York Region), concerns stemming from the use of combined and/
Commission's proposal for reporting at 1. or separate questions on race and Hispanic origin).
VerDate Aug2005 15:28 Nov 25, 2005 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM 28NON1
71298 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 227 / Monday, November 28, 2005 / Notices
Data Collection: Suggested may find it necessary for research or appropriate placement for their `mid-
Questionnaire statistical purposes, or for self- level' management,'' resulting in
The EEOC's ``Suggested Employee monitoring, to collect more detailed discrepant placement for managers who
Questionnaire on Race and Ethnicity'' data than needed to complete the EEO do the same functions for different
generated extensive public comment. 1 report. We commend such efforts. companies. Although the Chamber
Several employer groups observed that As to the method for collecting data, favored keeping a single category for
the instructions for the questionnaire the basic principles for ethnic and racial Officials and Managers, it urged the
strongly encouraged employees to self-identification for purposes of the Commission to consider two levels of
provide multiple race data in much EEO1 report are: management (Senior and Other) as an
more detail than the proposed EEO1 1. Offer employees the opportunity to alternative. The EEAC urged retention of
required it to be reported. In the opinion self-identify; the status quo, arguing that the new
of these groups, the lack of consistency 2. Provide a statement about the subcategories would yield numbers that
between the suggested questionnaire voluntary nature of this inquiry for would be too small to support
and the revised EEO1 race and ethnic employees. For example, language such meaningful statistical analysis for each
categories could foster employee as the following may be used establishment.
mistrust and prove to be (employers may adapt this language). Other employer groups supported this
administratively burdensome for The employer is subject to certain aspect of the proposal. SHRM noted that
employers. See, e.g., Written Comments governmental recordkeeping and reporting it would result in data ``permit[ing] both
of EEAC; Written Comments of ORC requirements for the administration of civil the government and employers a better
Worldwide. Specifically, employers rights laws and regulations. In order to analysis of progress or lack thereof in
focused on language in the Suggested comply with these laws, the employer invites glass ceiling 11 initiatives.'' See Written
employees to voluntarily self-identify their Comments of SHRM. The National
Questionnaire that first provided two
race and ethnicity. Submission of this Industry Liaison Group (NILG) wrote
separate questions for workers to self- information is voluntary and refusal to
identify their ethnicity and their race, that this proposal would enhance
provide it will not subject you to any adverse
but then informed the employees who treatment. The information will be kept affirmative action and diversity
marked ``Yes'' to the Hispanic question confidential and will only be used in planning and also allow ``for a more
that their race would not be reported to accordance with the provisions of applicable precise analysis of EEO1 trend data.''
the government. Other commenters, laws, executive orders, and regulations, See Written Comments of NILG. ORC
however, made the point that employers including those that require the information Worldwide testified that ``many ORC
may need to collect data about the race to be summarized and reported to the federal members already report their officials
of Hispanic or Latino employees for government for civil rights enforcement. and managers in this manner so the
When reported, data will not identify any subdivision [would] not [be] seen as an
research or statistical purposes or to
specific individual.
defend against potential EEO claims. additional burden.'' (Referring to
See, e.g., Written Comments of Chamber Job Categories OFCCP's Corporate Management
of Commerce (noting that many The public comments and testimony Review). See Written Testimony for
Chamber members commented that race about the proposed job categories Hearing of H. Juanita M. Beecher of ORC
information for Hispanic or Latino focused on three main issues: Worldwide.
individuals would be beneficial for Civil rights groups supported this
Subdividing Officials and Managers into
purposes of conducting voluntary change. The National Partnership for
hierarchical subcategories; renumbering
internal analyses of their workforce and/ Women & Families and the Women
job categories so that Service Workers
or addressing potential allegations of Employed Institute observed that the
appeared earlier on the list; and adding
discrimination). proposed EEO-1 would report basic data
minor, new language to the definitions
Employer groups made several other reflecting major differences in job
of Professionals and Technicians.
suggestions about language, for content, wage rates and opportunities
example, urging the Commission to Subdividing Officials and Managers without unfairly burdening employers.
emphasize the voluntary nature of the The Commission's June 11, 2003 See Written Comments of National
questionnaire. However, one employer proposal divided Officials and Managers Partnership for Women & Families and
group urged the Commission to make into three hierarchical subcategories to Women Employed Institute. NAPALC
the questionnaire a mandatory gather data about the progress of women agreed that more detailed management
government form, like the I9.10 See data were necessary to remedy
and minorities in management. The
Supplemental Submission of ORC employment discrimination affecting
proposed subcategories, based on
Worldwide. Asians, especially given studies
In response to these comments, the responsibility, general lines of reporting,
and skill, were: Executive/Senior Level showing that Asians and Pacific
Commission will not adopt the Islanders are not enjoying upward
``Suggested Employee Questionnaire on Officials and Managers (formulate
policies and set strategies); Mid Level mobility in the workforce
Race and Ethnicity.'' Employers must, at commensurate with their high levels of
a minimum, have the data that are Officials and Managers (lead major
business units in implementing education. See Written Comments of
necessary to complete the EEO1 report, NAPALC. Finally, the Leadership
which lists employee ethnicity or race Executives' strategies); and First Level
Officials and Managers (implement Conference on Civil Rights, joined by
in a total of seven categories. The MALDEF, commended the proposal as
Commission notes that some employers policies in daily operations and report
to the Mid Level Managers). an opportunity to correct the overly
Some employer groups opposed the broad categorization of ``Officials and
10 U.S. employers are responsible for completion
proposal as burdensome and Managers'' and to obtain data about
and retention of Form I9, Employment Verification
Eligibility Form, for each individual they hire for unproductive. For example, the racial and gender stratification
employment in the United State, including citizens Chamber of Commerce wrote that
and noncitizens. On the form, the employer must 11 ``Glass ceiling'' is a term used to describe the
verify the employment eligibility and identity
organizations with more than three discriminatory, artificial barriers that hinder the
documents presented by the employee and record levels of management ``will advancement of women and minorities to upper
the document information. undoubtedly struggle with the level job positions.
VerDate Aug2005 15:28 Nov 25, 2005 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM 28NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 227 / Monday, November 28, 2005 / Notices 71299
occurring at or above the ``glass ceiling.'' who oversee and direct the delivery of whereas the EEO1 job categories--
See Testimony of Wade Henderson of products, services or functions at group, especially the management
the Leadership Conference on Civil regional or divisional levels of subcategories--emphasize differences in
Rights; Testimony of Marisa J. Demeo of organizations. These officials and responsibility and influence. For
MALDEF. managers receive directions from example, in categorizing a computer and
The Commission continues to believe Executive/Senior Level management information systems manager, the
that a single category for all officials and and typically lead major business units. Census codes would place the Chief
managers is no longer acceptable. It They implement policies, programs and Technology Officer at a headquarters of
conflates data about jobs of widely directives of Executive/Senior Level a large corporation (who has regular
discrepant responsibility, compensation management through subordinate interaction with the CEO) in the same
and skill, and thereby risks obscuring managers and within the parameters set category as an IT manager at a regional
important trends in the employment of by Executive/Senior Level management. office (who has little if any interaction
women and minorities. The proposal to Examples of these kinds of officials and with the CEO).
subdivide this category is therefore managers are: Vice presidents and Instead of using Census codes, the
consistent with increased interest in directors; group, regional or divisional Commission will categorize Officials
glass ceiling issues in recent years. The controllers; treasurers; and human and Managers based on their level of
Commission recognizes, however, that resources, information systems, responsibility and influence in the
employer groups raised legitimate marketing, and operations managers. organizational hierarchy, as described
concerns about the likelihood of The First/Mid Level Officials and above. The intention is for each
inconsistent categorization of middle Managers subcategory also includes subcategory of Officials and Managers to
level managers who perform the same those who report directly to middle include individuals with equivalent
functions at different companies. We managers. These individuals serve at levels of influence and responsibility at
therefore adopt two subcategories of functional, line of business segment or different organizations, even though
Officials and Managers: Executive/ branch levels and are responsible for their titles may not always be the same.
Senior Level Officials and Managers; directing and executing the day-to-day Executive/Senior Level Officials and
and First/Mid Level Officials and operational objectives of enterprises/ Managers are defined as those who plan,
Managers. The EEO-1 Instruction organizations, conveying the directions direct and formulate policy, set strategy
Booklet includes a ``Description of Job of higher level officials and managers to and provide the overall direction of
Categories'' which provides subordinate personnel and, in some enterprises/organizations. They include,
significantly more detailed descriptions instances, directly supervising the in larger organizations, those
of the two tiers of officials and activities of exempt and non-exempt individuals within two reporting levels
managers. These descriptions, personnel. Examples of these kinds of of the CEO, whose responsibilities
reproduced below, should be helpful to officials and managers are: First-line require frequent interaction with the
employers in assigning official and managers; team managers; unit CEO. First/Mid Level Managers are
manager positions to the appropriate managers; operations and production defined as those who direct
subcategory: managers; branch managers; implementation or operations within
Executive/Senior Level Officials and administrative services managers; the specific parameters established by
Managers. Individuals who plan, direct purchasing and transportation Executive/Senior Level management, as
and formulate policies, set strategy and managers; storage and distribution well as those who oversee
provide the overall direction of managers; call center or customer implementation of day-to-day goals.
enterprises/organizations for the service managers; technical support Moreover, in the past, the Officials
development and delivery of products managers; and brand or product and Managers category contained non-
and services, within the parameters managers. managerial officials with expertise in
approved by boards of directors or other As employers begin the process of business and financial occupations.
governing bodies. Residing in the assigning Official and Manager