Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Submission for OMB Review, 57098-57100 [E8-23069]

Agencies

• Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 191 (Wednesday, October 1, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57098-57100]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-23069]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION


Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; 
Submission for OMB Review

AGENCY: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

ACTION: Final Notice of Submission for OMB Review.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the 
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) hereby gives notice that 
it has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request 
to approve a new information collection as described below.

DATES: Written comments on this final notice must be submitted on or 
before October 31, 2008.

ADDRESSES: The Request for Clearance (SF 83-I), supporting statement, 
and other documents submitted to OMB for review may be obtained from: 
Mildred A. Rivera-Rau, General Attorney, Federal Sector Programs, 
Office of Federal Operations, EEOC, 1801 L Street, NW., Washington, 
D.C. 20507; (202) 663-4590; (202) 663-7208 (TTD); 
mildred.rivera@eeoc.gov. Comments on this final notice must be 
submitted to Chandana Achanta, Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs, OMB, 725 17th Street, NW., Room 10235, New Executive Office 
Building, Washington, DC 20503 or electronically mailed to Chandana_
L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov. Comments should also be sent to Stephen 
Llewellyn, Executive Officer, Executive Secretariat, EEOC, 10th Floor, 
1801 L Street, NW., Washington, D.C. 20507, or by the Federal 
eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. After accessing this 
Web site, follow its instructions for submitting comments. As a 
convenience to commenters, the Executive Secretariat will accept 
comments totaling six or fewer pages by facsimile (``FAX'') machine. 
This limitation is necessary to ensure access to the equipment. The 
telephone number of the FAX receiver is (202) 663-4114. (This is not a 
toll-free number). Receipt of FAX transmittals will not be 
acknowledged, except that the sender may request confirmation of 
receipt by calling the Executive Secretariat staff at (202) 663-4070 or 
(202) 663-4074 (TTD). (These are not toll-free telephone numbers).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Dougherty, Federal Sector 
Programs, Office of Federal Operations, EEOC, 1801 L Street, NW., 
Washington, DC 20507; (202) 663-4770; (202) 663-7208 (TTD). This notice 
is also available in the following formats: large print, Braille, audio 
tape and electronic file on computer disk. Requests for this notice in 
an alternative format should be made to the Publications Center at 1-
800-669-3362.

[[Page 57099]]


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice that EEOC would be submitting this 
request was published in the Federal Register on November 15, 2007, 
allowing for a 60-day public comment period. Five comments were 
received. The first comment expressed general opposition to the 
collection of race-specific data in any form by the federal government 
due to the lack of evidence that there is widespread discrimination in 
the federal government. In addition, this commenter believed that 
collection of the demographic information would harm the federal 
government by requiring increased representation of underrepresented 
groups without regard to qualifications, thus leaving the government 
open to litigation and claims of ``reverse'' discrimination. The 
commenter believed that the proposed data collection would create an 
emphasis to ``get numbers up to a level that is perceived to be `right' 
'' and would place pressure on agencies to focus their recruitment on 
``women and minorities.'' This commenter further questioned the utility 
of the data because some applicants would refuse to respond. Finally, 
this commenter found that the proposed Demographic Information on 
Applicants form did not explain who is considered an applicant or when 
the form should be administered.
    A second commenter did not oppose the collection of demographic 
data but advised that during a November 27, 2007, Council of Federal 
EEO and Civil Rights Executives meeting, a manager of the Office of 
Personnel Management (OPM) opined that federal executives should not 
collect the demographic information of applicants for federal 
employment. The commenter requested that EEOC and OPM resolve the 
matter prior to seeking OMB approval. This commenter also believed that 
the Demographic Information on Applicants form does not use the nine 
categories of ``targeted'' disabilities that EEOC previously 
established. A third commenter requested that the definition of each 
demographic category used on Question 4 be eliminated for clarity and 
ease of form administration. The fourth and fifth commenters strongly 
supported the collection of demographic data. One such commenter noted 
that the collection would: ``ensure applicants are treated fairly; 
evaluate federal recruitment efforts; and identify racial, ethnic, or 
other disparities within the federal workforce.'' In addition, the 
commenters felt that the collection tool was an important step forward, 
will allow for more refined analysis, and enable the scrutiny of 
workplace practices including areas for targeted recruitment.
    The perception of discrimination among federal employees and 
applicants is fairly widespread. According to the EEOC's latest Annual 
Report on the Federal Work Force Fiscal Year 2007, there were 37,809 
completed EEO counselings at federal agencies during fiscal year (FY) 
2007. Government-wide, federal employees filed 16,363 formal EEO 
complaints in FY 2007. Also in FY 2007, 7,869 federal hearings were 
requested, and EEOC's Office of Federal Operations received 5,226 
appeals. These numbers show that EEOC's effort to foster the creation 
of agency model EEO programs through Management Directive 715 (MD-715) 
is a valuable endeavor. Part of that effort includes the collection of 
demographic information on applicants for federal employment.
    The proposed Demographic Information on Applicants form neither 
establishes a new requirement to collect applicant flow data nor adds 
emphasis to the collection of such data. MD-715 has required the 
analysis of applicant flow data for more than four years; however, 
analysis was hampered by the lack of a data collection tool. Some 
agencies, including the Department of Transportation, already have 
obtained OMB approval for department-specific demographic information 
collection forms. The use of this proposed general form is intended to 
alleviate the problem of requiring each agency to seek OMB approval for 
a data collection tool. Finally, this collection of data does not 
mandate that agencies make any employment decision based on race or 
sex, or require a specific number of hires for any EEO group. This data 
collection is useful to gain an accurate picture of applicant flow in 
each agency to ensure that each agency is aware of the effects of its 
recruitment and hiring practices.
    The collection of demographic data under MD-715 requires annotation 
of the number of applicants who were deemed qualified for each 
position, broken down by EEO group and occupational category. There is 
no requirement or implication that a particular number or percentage of 
applicants must be deemed qualified for any position or that 
unqualified applicants be selected. Each agency determines whether an 
applicant is qualified based on the requirements of the specific 
position. Applicants' EEO status is, by law, separated from the 
employment application prior to submission to the selecting official, 
thereby precluding consideration of race or national origin in the 
hiring decision. The use of the Demographic Information on Applicants 
form does not require an agency to narrow its recruitment to certain 
targeted EEO groups to the exclusion of other EEO groups. This tool 
will be used to determine if the agency is reaching a broad range of 
applicants from diverse groups who are qualified for the positions 
being posted.
    The data submission is voluntary. Applicants are informed of the 
request and may decline to respond for any reason or no reason. If the 
group being measured is sufficiently large, even a partial response 
rate will yield useful data. If the agency does not receive a 
significant response, it can make note of this in its MD-715 report to 
EEOC.
    Each agency must determine when the applicant flow form is to be 
distributed and by what means. This will necessarily be tailored to the 
method by which applications are received in each agency.
    Although OPM does not concur with EEOC's view on the advisability 
of collecting applicant flow data, EEOC is the federal agency charged 
with the implementation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and 
Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act. EEOC believes that collection 
and analysis of applicant flow data is an important component of any 
EEO program striving to achieve model workplace status. This form 
simply presents--to those agencies that choose to use it--a streamlined 
way of collecting that data.
    The proposed Demographic Information on Applicants form does use 
the term ``disability'' despite the use of the term ``handicap'' in OPM 
Form 256 (on which it was modeled) as the term ``handicap'' is no 
longer commonly used. The nine disability categories used are those 
EEOC uses for MD-715 data collection. However, the commenter is correct 
in that three of the nine categories are slightly modified from OPM 
Form 256. First, there is a discrepancy in question (5)(6) in the 
category of ``Seizure/convulsive disorder.'' The proposed form uses the 
term ``seizure'' in addition to ``convulsive disorder.'' The term 
``seizure'' is not used in OPM Form 256 but does accurately describe 
the impairment EEOC is targeting. Second, in question (5)(7) the term 
``intellectual disorder'' is used along with ``mental retardation'' 
because more recently ``intellectual disability'' is the favored term 
for persons with mental retardation. Finally, in question (5)(8), EEOC 
uses the term ``Psychiatric Disorder or a history of treatment for 
mental or emotional illness.'' OPM Form 256 states this category as 
``Mental or emotional illness (A history of

[[Page 57100]]

treatment for mental or emotional problems).'' While OPM Form 256 does 
not include the words ``psychiatric disorder,'' this term has come to 
be preferred and provides a fuller, more contemporary description. 
These three disability categories, which have been slightly modified, 
are not intended to be different from those EEOC previously has used. 
The minor changes are intended only to provide more clarity given the 
change in common usage since 1987--the year OPM Form 256 was drafted.
    Due in part to the change in the definition of ``Asian'' over the 
past several years, EEOC believes it useful to include--in Question 4 
of the proposed form--definitions for each race or national origin 
category. The proposed Demographic Information on Applicants form also 
will be revised to delete the ``n'' from the term ``Alaskan Native'' in 
question 4 to read ``1. American Indian or Alaska Native.'' Finally, 
the phrase ``and you may self identify at any time'' has been added to 
the section of the form that applies to self-identification of 
disability status.

Overview of This Information Collection

    Type of Review: New collection.
    Collection Title: Demographic Information on Applicants form.
    Form No.: None.
    Frequency of Report: Occasional.
    Type of Respondent: Applicants for federal employment.
    Description of Affected Public: Individuals submitting applications 
for federal employment.
    Responses: 3,510,600.
    Reporting Hours: 175,530 (3 minutes per response).
    Costs to Respondents: None.
    Federal Cost: None.
    Abstract: EEOC enforces Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the 
Rehabilitation Act, among other equal employment opportunity laws. 
Pursuant to its authority under those statutes, EEOC issued Equal 
Employment Opportunity Management Directive 715 (MD-715) in 2003. MD-
715 provides policy guidance and standards for establishing and 
maintaining effective affirmative programs of equal employment 
opportunity under Section 717 of Title VII and effective affirmative 
action programs under Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act. The 
overriding objective of MD-715 is to ensure that all employees and 
applicants for employment enjoy equality of opportunity in the federal 
workplace regardless of race, color, sex, age, national origin, 
religion, or disability. In order to ensure that agencies proactively 
prevent potential discrimination and establish systems to monitor 
compliance with Title VII and the Rehabilitation Act, MD-715 requires 
agencies to evaluate their employment practices by collecting and 
analyzing data on the race, national origin, sex, and disability status 
of applicants for both permanent and temporary employment. This notice 
concerns an optional form for use by federal agencies in gathering 
demographic information on applicants for federal employment. Use of 
the form is not required. Federal agencies may or may not elect to use 
the form. Applicants for federal employment may or may not elect to 
complete the form.
    Burden Statement: The estimated number of respondents is 
approximately 3,510,600 applicants. The burden is estimated to be 
approximately three minutes per respondent. Because the form is 
voluntary, there is no way accurately to predict the number of 
applicants who will respond.

    Dated: September 11, 2008.

    For the Commission.
Naomi C. Earp,
Chair.
 [FR Doc. E8-23069 Filed 9-30-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6570-01-P