Notice of Final Equal Employment Opportunity Program Circular, 67047-67051 [2016-23505]

Download as PDF mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2016 / Notices systems replacement. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ), the airport operator, plans to conduct the construction in three phases in order to minimize operational impacts during the busiest summer months of June through August. Phase I anticipates a full closure of Runway 4R/22L, currently scheduled from February 27 to June 1, 2017. Phase II anticipates closures nightly from 0400 to 1100 UTC from June 1 to September 4, 2017, followed by Phase III with a full Runway 4R/22L closure planned from September 5 to November 17, 2017. The FAA and the PANYNJ are working together to minimize operational disruptions to the extent possible. The FAA is also continuing to review alternative runway configurations and procedures and modeling potential capacity and delay impacts. Regular meetings are conducted with the FAA, PANYNJ, and airline station and other staff, and may be the best source of project updates and impacts. LAX will undergo construction on Runway 7L/25R for runway safety areas and rehabilitation in 2017. Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA), the airport operator, will close the runway for approximately four months from January to May 2017. The final dates have not been determined at this time. LAWA conducts monthly meetings on construction updates with FAA local air traffic control and airline representatives. Such meetings may be the best source of project updates and impacts. The FAA will use hourly runway capacity throughput for the Level 2 airports in its schedule reviews, considering any differences associated with runway construction or other operational factors. The FAA will also review the operational performance metrics at the airports for the summer 2016 scheduling season as additional data become available. EWR is transitioning from Level 3 limitations under the FAA Order to a Level 2 designation effective with the winter 2016 scheduling season.2 In reviewing schedules, the FAA will consider the recent operational performance metrics, delay projections when the Level 3 scheduling limits were adopted in 2008, and the scheduled flight levels the FAA accepted under the 2008 Order. Based on current and projected demand for the summer 2017 scheduling season, the FAA anticipates the 0700 to 0859 and 1400–2059 Eastern 2 Operating Limitations at Newark Liberty International Airport, 73 FR 29550 (May 21, 2008) as amended 79 FR 16857 (Mar. 26, 2014). Change in Newark Liberty International Airport Designation, 81 FR 19861 (April 6, 2016). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:51 Sep 28, 2016 Jkt 238001 Time (1100 to 1259 and 1800 to 0059 UTC) hours will be the highest demand periods and not all requests are likely to be accommodated during these times. Carriers should be prepared to adjust schedules to meet available capacity in order to minimize potential congestion and delay. Each Level 2 airport also has a separate process adopted by the airport operator for certain types of flights, such as international passenger flights, or at particular terminals or gates. Those processes with the individual airports or terminals will continue separately from and in addition to the FAA review of schedules based on runway capacity. However, in conjunction with the schedule facilitators for terminal operations at those airports, the FAA may consider the need to harmonize terminal and runway availability in the schedule review process. Issued in Washington, DC, on September 23, 2016. Daniel E. Smiley, Vice President, System Operations Services. [FR Doc. 2016–23563 Filed 9–28–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Sunshine Act Meetings; Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of Directors Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT. AGENCY: Notice of Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of Directors meeting ACTION: The meeting will be held on October 13, 2016, from 12:00 Noon to 3:00 p.m., Eastern Daylight Time. TIME AND DATE: This meeting will be open to the public via conference call. Any interested person may call 1–877–422– 1931, passcode 2855443940, to listen and participate in this meeting. PLACE: STATUS: Open to the public. The Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of Directors (the Board) will continue its work in developing and implementing the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Agreement and to that end, may consider matters properly before the Board. MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Avelino Gutierrez, Chair, Unified Carrier Registration Board of Directors at (505) 827–4565. PO 00000 Frm 00129 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 67047 Issued on: September 23, 2016. Larry W. Minor, Associate Administrator, Office of Policy, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. [FR Doc. 2016–23654 Filed 9–27–16; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Transit Administration [Docket Number: FTA–2016–0013] Notice of Final Equal Employment Opportunity Program Circular AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration, DOT. Notice of availability of final Circular. ACTION: The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has placed in the docket and on its Web site guidance in the form of a Circular to assist recipients in complying with various Equal Employment Opportunity regulations and statutes. The purpose of this Circular is to provide recipients of FTA financial assistance with instructions and guidance necessary to carry out the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Equal Employment Opportunity regulations. FTA is updating its Equal Employment Opportunity Circular to clarify the requirements for compliance. DATES: Effective Date: The final Circular becomes effective October 31, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For program questions, Anita Heard, Office of Civil Rights, Federal Transit Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room E54–306, Washington, DC 20590, phone: (202) 493–0318, or email, anita.heard@dot.gov. For legal questions, Bonnie Graves, Office of Chief Counsel, 90 Seventh Street, Suite 15–300, San Francisco, CA 94103, phone: (202) 366–4011, fax: (415) 734– 9489, or email, bonnie.graves@dot.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice provides a summary of the final changes to the EEO Circular and responses to comments. The final Circular itself is not included in this notice; instead, an electronic version may be found on FTA’s Web site, at www.transit.dot.gov, and in the docket, at www.regulations.gov. Paper copies of the final Circular may be obtained by contacting FTA’s Administrative Services Help Desk, at (202) 366–4865. SUMMARY: Table of Contents I. Overview II. Chapter-by-Chapter Analysis A. Chapter 1—Introduction and Applicability E:\FR\FM\29SEN1.SGM 29SEN1 67048 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2016 / Notices B. Chapter 2—EEO Program Requirements C. Chapter 3—EEO Compliance Oversight, Complaints, and Enforcement D. Attachments I. Overview FTA is updating its EEO Circular to clarify what recipients must do to comply with Titles VI and VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title II of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA), 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 (Federal Transit law), other Federal civil rights statutes, and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations in 49 CFR part 21. FTA issued a notice of availability of the proposed Circular and a request for comments in the Federal Register (81 FR 11348) on March 3, 2016. The comment period closed May 2, 2016. We received comments from 19 entities, including transit agencies, State DOTs, individuals, and the American Public Transportation Association. In addition, in accordance with Executive Order 12067, FTA coordinated development of this final Circular with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). We have made clarifying edits in response to EEOC comments on the Circular. This notice addresses comments received and explains changes we made to the Circular in response to comments. II. Chapter-by-Chapter Analysis mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES General Comments The Circular is organized topically. Each chapter begins with an introduction and is divided into sections and subsections. The organizational structure includes the text of the guidance, followed by a clearly delineated discussion section (as needed), which provides the means of complying with the law, as well as relevant good practices. One commenter requested a clarification of items presented as ‘‘good practices.’’ The commenter expressed concern that the good practices might form the basis for a deficiency finding in a future FTA oversight review. To address this concern we added a statement at the beginning of chapter 1: ‘‘Good practices, while encouraged, are not requirements. Agencies that do not utilize these practices are not subjecting themselves to findings in oversight reviews.’’ One commenter objected to the statement on the cover page of the Circular that states, ‘‘FTA reserves the right to update this Circular to reflect changes in other revised or new guidance and regulations that undergo notice and comment, without further VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:51 Sep 28, 2016 Jkt 238001 notice and comment on this Circular.’’ This language appears on the cover page of all FTA circulars. In the event a regulatory or other cross-cutting requirement has changed, it has changed with a notice and comment process, so there is no need for a second notice and comment process in order to update the Circular to reflect the change. FTA encourages stakeholders to sign up for email updates on FTA’s Web site, www.transit.dot.gov. One commenter suggested that FTA should monitor recipients more closely instead of relying on recipients’ certification of compliance. FTA conducts reviews of all recipients on a triennial basis, conducts specialized EEO reviews, and investigates complaints. In addition, recipients’ employees have the right to file complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Given the remedies available to employees, the large number of FTA recipients, and limited FTA resources, we believe our level of monitoring recipients for compliance is appropriate. A. Chapter 1—Introduction and Applicability Chapter 1 of the Circular is an introductory chapter that reviews the organization of the Circular, the authority for establishing the Circular, and applicability to recipients. One commenter suggested we add ‘‘disability,’’ ‘‘veteran status,’’ and ‘‘genetic information’’ to the list of bases on which discrimination is prohibited, and we have added those terms in section 1.2, Organization of this Circular. In section 1.3, Authorities, we have added the Equal Pay Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and Title II of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008. In the Definitions section we have made clarifying edits to the terms Complainant, Concentration, Disability, Discrimination, Disparate Impact, Disparate Treatment, Protected Class, and Underutilization. We have added definitions for the terms Four-fifths Rule, Reasonable Accommodation, Retaliation, and Sex-based Discrimination. Finally, we replaced the term Primary Recipient with the term Direct Recipient, and replaced the term One-person Rule with the term Wholeperson Rule. FTA requested comments regarding a potential change to the threshold for Equal Employment Opportunity Program submission from the current standard of recipients with 50 transit- PO 00000 Frm 00130 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 related employees, to recipients with 100 transit-related employees. Commenters supported this threshold increase, and we have adopted the increased threshold in the final Circular. Further, agencies with 50–99 employees will not be required to conduct a utilization analysis with goals and timetables or to submit an EEO Program to FTA. They will instead prepare and maintain an abbreviated EEO Program and provide it to FTA upon request or for any State Management Review or Triennial Review. The Circular does not apply to transit employers with fewer than 50 employees. One commenter asked FTA to clarify the 100 transit-related employees threshold and to more clearly define what collateral duties include for parttime employees. This information is in section 1.4 of the Circular and in a footnote in that section. When calculating the total number of transitrelated employees, agencies are required to include all part-time employees and employees with collateral duties that support the transit program. For example, a budget analyst who processes payments for the transit program would be considered a transitrelated employee. FTA requested comments on potential changes to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between FTA and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). We received no comments. The Circular has been revised to reflect that pursuant to an MOU with FHWA, FHWA and FTA will jointly review, monitor, and approve State DOT EEO Programs. B. Chapter 2—EEO Program Requirements Chapter 2 explains the seven required elements of an EEO Program for FTA review. The chapter details required language, required supporting documentation, the type of analysis that must be conducted, and the acceptable methods to report the results of that analysis. 2.1 Frequency of Update FTA proposed that EEO Programs be updated and submitted to FTA on a triennial basis or as major changes occur in the workforce or employment conditions. One commenter suggested FTA add the language, ‘‘whichever comes first’’ at the end of the sentence to clarify that FTA requires the EEO Program to be updated at a minimum every three years, or sooner if conditions warrant. We have made that change. In addition, given that transit agencies must submit data to the EEOC every E:\FR\FM\29SEN1.SGM 29SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2016 / Notices other year, we have changed the reporting requirement to FTA to every four years. This should lessen the burden on transit agencies and allow them to report to EEOC and to FTA in the same year using the same data. FTA plans to publish a submission schedule for all agencies with 100 or more transitrelated employees. In order to get all agencies on a four-year schedule, some agencies may be required to submit an updated EEO Program sooner than they would otherwise have to. FTA will work to minimize impacts on agencies as we get all agencies on a new four-year schedule. FTA proposed removing the following sentence, which appears in the 1988 Circular: ‘‘At the discretion of FTA Office of Civil Rights, less information may be requested where the recipient’s previously submitted EEO Program has not changed significantly.’’ Several commenters disagreed with this proposal, asserting a requirement for a full update of an EEO Program when there are no significant changes places an unnecessary burden on small agencies that are in compliance and have limited staff, and is not necessary for agencies with strong EEO Programs or EEO Programs that have not changed significantly. In response to commenters, we have restored that language. mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES 2.2.1 Statement of Policy FTA proposed that agencies would be required to update their EEO policy annually or after the naming of a new CEO/GM or EEO Officer. One commenter suggested that if there are no changes to the EEO policy, there would be no need to update it. We revised the language to require a review and update at least every four years, when the EEO Program is submitted to FTA, or after the naming of a new CEO/GM or EEO Officer. 2.2.2 Dissemination FTA proposed that top management officials would need to meet quarterly to discuss the EEO Program and its implementation. Several commenters objected to this frequency, asserting it would be overly burdensome for the agency, and recommending semiannual or annual meetings would be sufficient. We agreed with those comments and revised the Circular to reflect that the meetings take place at least semiannually. In this section, FTA proposed that agencies be required to conduct EEO training for all new supervisors or managers within 30 days of their appointment. Two commenters suggested this timeframe should be VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:51 Sep 28, 2016 Jkt 238001 extended; one suggested the training take place within six months, and one recommended it take place within 90 days. We have revised the Circular to require that training for supervisors and managers be conducted within 90 days of their appointment. FTA proposed that agencies be required to meet with employees of protected classes and affinity groups to seek input on EEO Program implementation. Two commenters suggested that all employees should be invited to provide input on the program implementation, not just members of protected classes or affinity groups. We have revised the Circular to require meetings with all employees and affinity groups to seek input on EEO Program implementation. 2.2.3 Designation of Personnel In order to ensure impartiality and independence of the EEO Officer, FTA proposed that the EEO Officer would need to be separated from human resources officials. Several commenters objected to this proposal. The general consensus was that in agencies where the administrative staffs are small, separation of duties is impossible. One agency asserted that to create an EEO position separate from human resources would dilute the department’s effectiveness to ensure EEO and legal compliance. Others suggested such a separation would cast concerns on the ability of the human resources department to protect equal employment opportunity. One commenter suggested FTA should not attempt to dictate how individual agencies avoid such conflicts of interest and that there would be substantial costs involved. Another commenter asserted the proposed separation ignored the normal function and role of a human resources department—to be knowledgeable about and enforce labor and employment laws, regulations and workplace rules—and that attempting to carve out functions in a way that is illogical would only serve to confuse all employees in the organization. In response, we have revised this section to state that in order to maintain the independence and integrity of the EEO Officer, it may be necessary to separate the function from human resources. Agencies are not required to separate EEO and HR. However, in the event the EEO Officer is part of HR, we have added language that requires the agency to include in its EEO Program a detailed method for eliminating conflicts of interest in complaint investigations, including a narrative describing how independence and integrity of the EEO PO 00000 Frm 00131 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 67049 process will be achieved and maintained. Similar to the separation of function between EEO and HR, FTA proposed that in order to maintain distance between the investigation of EEO complaints and defense of the agency, that the functional unit that reviews EEO matters be separate and apart from the functional unit that represents the agency in EEO complaints. Several commenters objected to this proposal. One commenter expressed concern about the phrasing of the language, specifically that attorneys rather than EEO Officers would represent an agency at administrative hearings. Another commenter expressed concern that the separation could inhibit a lawyer’s ability to provide legal guidance on EEO requirements or could require the creation of two EEO offices, for internal and external complaints. Another commenter stated that the EEO Officer is better suited to report to a legal office because of the need for advice regarding perplexing or difficult EEO matters and the level of expertise needed to navigate the numerous EEO laws, regulations, and court rulings. In response, we clarified that the attorney who provides legal expertise to the EEO Officer in the investigation of a case cannot represent the agency in the same EEO case. FTA proposed that in order to ensure complaints are investigated effectively, those individuals charged with investigating complaints must have EEO investigative training. Two commenters requested clarification on what would constitute sufficient EEO investigative training for EEO Officers. We have revised the Circular to include the specific information that should be covered in this training. FTA proposed removing the requirement that EEO Officers concur on hires and promotions. Several commenters objected to this change. They asserted this requirement ensured the EEO Officer was involved in the process. They also suggested the removal of this function would undermine their ability to be part of the process. Two commenters supported the removal of the statement, stating the requirement was overly burdensome. We reinstated the statement and provided a sample concurrence checklist in an Attachment that clarifies what ‘‘concurrence’’ entails. 2.2.4 Utilization Analysis The utilization analysis is a comparative analysis in which the female and minority availability for each EEO subgroup is compared with the current workforce representation of females and minorities. E:\FR\FM\29SEN1.SGM 29SEN1 mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES 67050 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2016 / Notices There was a concern that ‘‘two or more races (not Hispanic or Latino)’’ is a subcategory that is currently not collected on the EEO–4 forms. OMB approved the change of the EEO–4 categories to be consistent with the EEO–1, including two or more races. One commenter was concerned that extending to agencies with fewer than 100 transit employees the requirement to complete the FTA’s electronic database for analysis and utilization of hires, promotions, and personnel’s applications, without additional financial resources, would be extremely burdensome for smaller agencies to complete and track. The commenter urged FTA to consider limiting the FTA analysis and utilization database submittal only to agencies that meet the threshold for the submittal of an EEO Program. In response, we revised the Circular to provide that agencies with 50–99 employees will not be required to submit a full plan to FTA every four years, and will not be required to conduct a utilization analysis. Two commenters sought clarification on how to track individuals with disabilities and veteran status with no baseline for availability. We have included language in section 2.2.6 that states we are not asking agencies to set a goal for veterans or persons with disabilities based on availability numbers. There is no whole person rule or four-fifths analysis. The agency can set its own specific aspirational goals, but the Circular asks agencies to track raw numbers; for example, the number applied, number hired, number applied for promotion, and number promoted. One commenter requested clarification on setting department/unit/ functional area goals. The Circular states, ‘‘Although FTA requires utilization data summarized for each job category, agencies are encouraged to compile workforce statistics for each department, job category, grade/rank of employee (e.g., Road Supervisor I or II, Mechanic A or B, etc.), and job title to include salary ranges and principal duties for the jobs in each subcategory.’’ We did not revise the Circular based on this comment, as the Circular states setting goals based on workforce statistics for each department, job category, grade/rank of employee is an encouraged good practice. It is not a requirement. 2.2.5 Goals and Timetables One commenter asserted that setting long-term and short-term goals and timetables for each individual minority group, broken down by specific racial/ ethnic subcategories for men and women, could only be achieved by VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:51 Sep 28, 2016 Jkt 238001 conducting targeted recruitments, which could be perceived as discriminatory in California under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). FTA did not revise the proposal, as the short-term and long-term goals are aspirational goals based on identified underutilization and the results of the employment practices analysis. agency employees (including layoffs). We have not revised the Circular in response to this comment, as the Circular provides for placing employees in similarly situated groupings (e.g., subject to the same schedule of disciplinary charges) and requires separate analyses for employees subject to different disciplinary processes. 2.2.6 Assessment of Employment Practices FTA proposed that agencies be required to describe their efforts to locate, qualify, and train employees in protected classes. One commenter asserted all employees, not just employees of a protected class, should be able to receive training and that any action to locate, qualify, and train employees in protected classes could be perceived as discriminatory under FEHA. Certainly all employees should be able to avail themselves of training; the only documentation FTA requires in the EEO Program is those efforts to locate, qualify, and train employees in protected classes. Another commenter asked for clarification on whether or not test validation documentation is required for all candidate selections. As clarification, test validation is completed per test, not per candidate. The commenter also asked FTA to clarify or remove the requirement that agencies provide a narrative of current seniority policies and procedures for union and nonunion workers. We have revised the Circular to provide that agencies must provide a narrative for union and nonunion workers if the seniority policies are different. In order to conduct a qualitative assessment of seniority practices to determine any potential disparate impact, a narrative must be provided. One commenter noted that revising union agreements is a complex process that cannot be done unilaterally by an agency. In response, we revised the Circular to state, ‘‘When agencies are negotiating or amending union agreements, FTA requires agencies to review and revise the agreements wherever current provisions are identified as barriers to equal employment.’’ The commenter further asserted, with regard to disciplinary procedures and termination practices, that it would be unreasonable to require agencies to use the ‘‘same’’ standard for determining when a person will be demoted, disciplined, or laid off in light of collectively bargained-for procedures and practices, and in light of state civil service law provisions governing the appointment, promotion and continuance of employment of certain 2.2.7 Monitoring and Reporting FTA proposed that agencies would be required to evaluate their EEO Programs at least quarterly. Several commenters objected to meeting with management quarterly to discuss the EEO Program and its implementation. They asserted it would be overly burdensome for the agency. We revised the Circular to reflect the evaluation should take place, at a minimum, semiannually. Some commenters suggested that unit managers should not have access to EEO information and that tracking this information is entirely a human resources function. There was also concern that reviewing this information with all levels of management could breach confidentiality for smaller agencies. The Circular has been revised to say all ‘‘program’’ EEO-related meetings should be discussed. The meetings that are conducted with managers are to discuss the agency’s progress in terms of meeting their EEO Program goals and requirements, not to discuss individual EEO complaints. One commenter questioned whether FTA is requiring the agency to track the agenda and outcome of every single meeting that the EEO Officer has with the CEO/GM, with any management official, and with human resources, with a concern on resource management. We are revising the Circular to provide documentation of meetings where EEO is officially discussed; for example, official EEO training and official meetings with management to report on EEO Program progress and plans of actions. There is no need to document every conversation. FTA proposed that one element of a successful EEO Program is to, ‘‘Produce documentation that supports actions to implement the plan for minority and female job applicants or employees and informs management of the program’s effectiveness.’’ One commenter suggested replacing ‘‘for minority and female’’ with ‘‘to improve diversity of.’’ FTA did not adopt this suggestion. We believe it is important to specifically state ‘‘minority and female’’ as opposed to the more general ‘‘improve diversity,’’ in order to ensure agencies are documenting their efforts appropriately. FTA proposed that one of the EEO Program attachments would be an PO 00000 Frm 00132 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\29SEN1.SGM 29SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2016 / Notices organization chart showing the reporting relationships of all positions. One commenter suggested the organizational chart section should be revised so that it did not include the names of all employees. We have revised the Circular to clarify that only directors, department heads, and executive leadership are to be named on the organization chart. FTA sought comment on how long it would take to develop an EEO Program with the requirements set out in chapter 2 of the Circular. FTA also sought suggestions from recipients regarding how to use information technology to decrease the amount of time it takes to develop an EEO Program. One commenter suggested that the Circular has new data collection requirements that will require coordination with departmental units such as human resources and information technology. The commenter sought a 12-month grace period before new statistical data is required. As stated above, FTA will be drafting a new schedule for quadrennial submission of EEO Programs to FTA. FTA will work with agencies that find themselves on the ‘‘earlier’’ side of the schedule and that may need to update their internal practices in order to develop an effective EEO Program. C. Chapter 3—EEO Compliance Oversight, Complaints, and Enforcement One commenter requested additional clarity and definition of factors and concerns that may trigger a discretionary review. We revised the Circular to clarify the six factors that contribute to the selection for a civil rights specialized review. mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES D. Attachments In the proposed Circular, FTA included several Attachments: Attachment 1, References; Attachment 2, Sample EEO Policy Statement; and Attachment 3, Sample Excel Charts. We did not receive comments on any of the Attachments. In response to comments that the EEO Officer should concur in the hiring and promotion process, we have added a new Attachment, Sample Concurrence Checklist. Additionally, we added a copy of the EEO–4 form, Program Submission checklist, EEO Program checklist. The Circular now includes: Attachment 1, Sample Policy Statement; Attachment 2, Sample Concurrence Checklist; Attachment 3, EEO–4 Form; Attachment 4, Sample Employment Practices and Utilization Analysis Excel Charts; Attachment 5, EEO Program Submission Checklist; VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:51 Sep 28, 2016 Jkt 238001 Attachment 6, Sample EEO Program Checklist; Attachment 7, References. Carolyn Flowers, Acting Administrator. [FR Doc. 2016–23505 Filed 9–28–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–57–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Transit Administration FY16 Discretionary Funding Opportunity: Low or No Emission Component Assessment Program (LoNo-CAP) Federal Transit Administration (FTA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) and Request for Proposals (RFP). AGENCY: The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is requesting proposals from qualified institutions of higher education to conduct testing, evaluation, and analysis of low or no emission components intended for use in low or no emission transit buses used to provide public transportation. FTA is authorized to pay 50 percent of the established assessment fees, up to $3.0 million annually. A total of $15.0 million is authorized at $3.0 million per year starting in FY 2016 through FY2020 to carry out the Low and No Emission Component Assessment Program (LoNo-CAP). Funds awarded under the LoNo-CAP program will be used to reimburse the cost of assessing eligible components. DATES: Complete proposals must be submitted electronically through the GRANTS.GOV ‘‘APPLY’’ function by 11:59 EDT on November 28, 2016. Prospective applicants should initiate the process by registering on the GRANTS.GOV Web site promptly to ensure completion of the application process before the submission deadline. This announcement is also available at FTA’s Web site at: https:// www.transit.dot.gov/funding/grants/ notices and in the ‘‘FIND’’ module of GRANTS.GOV. The funding opportunity ID is FTA–2016–009–TRILoNoCAP and the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number for Section 5312 is 20.514. Mail and fax submissions will not be accepted. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marcel Belanger, Bus Testing Program Manager, FTA Office of Research, Demonstration, and Innovation at: (202) 366–0725 or LoNo-CAP@dot.gov. A TDD is available for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing at 1–800–877–8339. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00133 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 67051 Table of Contents A. Program Description B. Federal Award Information C. Eligibility Information D. Application and Submission Information E. Application Review F. Federal Award Administration G. Federal Awarding Agency Contacts H. Other Information A. Program Description FTA recognizes that a significant transformation is occurring in the transit bus industry, with the increasing availability and deployment of low and zero emission transit buses for revenue operations. The adoption of these technologically advanced transit buses will allow the country’s transportation systems to move toward a cleaner and more energy-efficient future, as described in the U.S. Department of Transportation’s recent report, Beyond Traffic 2045. FTA remains committed to the deployment of low or no emission transit buses to support the transition of the nation’s transit fleet to the lowest polluting and most energy-efficient transit bus technologies, thereby reducing local air pollution and direct carbon emissions by way of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP–21), Public Law 112–141, July 6, 2012, Section 5312 Low or No Emission Vehicle Deployment Program (LoNo) and the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, Public Law 114–94, December 4, 2015, 5339(c) Low or No Emission Grant Program (Low-No). Since 2014, FTA has provided over $100 million in competitive funds to support the introduction of low and no emission transit buses into transit system fleets. LoNo-CAP directly supports the mission of FTA’s ongoing LoNo programs. FTA’s goals for LoNo-CAP, in general, are to: • Provide unbiased assessments of low or no emission vehicle components, documenting (at a minimum) the maintainability, reliability, performance, structural integrity, efficiency, and noise of the tested components • Increase the quality and lower the overall cost of low or no emission vehicle components • Expand the supply chain for low or no emission vehicle components • Increase the deployment of the cleanest and most energy-efficient transit buses into transit agency fleets • Advance the development of materials, technologies, and safer designs • Support the development of applicable standards, protocols, and best practices E:\FR\FM\29SEN1.SGM 29SEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 189 (Thursday, September 29, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67047-67051]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23505]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Transit Administration

[Docket Number: FTA-2016-0013]


Notice of Final Equal Employment Opportunity Program Circular

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of availability of final Circular.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has placed in the 
docket and on its Web site guidance in the form of a Circular to assist 
recipients in complying with various Equal Employment Opportunity 
regulations and statutes. The purpose of this Circular is to provide 
recipients of FTA financial assistance with instructions and guidance 
necessary to carry out the U.S. Department of Transportation's Equal 
Employment Opportunity regulations. FTA is updating its Equal 
Employment Opportunity Circular to clarify the requirements for 
compliance.

DATES:  Effective Date: The final Circular becomes effective October 
31, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For program questions, Anita Heard, 
Office of Civil Rights, Federal Transit Administration, 1200 New Jersey 
Avenue SE., Room E54-306, Washington, DC 20590, phone: (202) 493-0318, 
or email, anita.heard@dot.gov. For legal questions, Bonnie Graves, 
Office of Chief Counsel, 90 Seventh Street, Suite 15-300, San 
Francisco, CA 94103, phone: (202) 366-4011, fax: (415) 734-9489, or 
email, bonnie.graves@dot.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice provides a summary of the final 
changes to the EEO Circular and responses to comments. The final 
Circular itself is not included in this notice; instead, an electronic 
version may be found on FTA's Web site, at www.transit.dot.gov, and in 
the docket, at www.regulations.gov. Paper copies of the final Circular 
may be obtained by contacting FTA's Administrative Services Help Desk, 
at (202) 366-4865.

Table of Contents

I. Overview
II. Chapter-by-Chapter Analysis
    A. Chapter 1--Introduction and Applicability

[[Page 67048]]

    B. Chapter 2--EEO Program Requirements
    C. Chapter 3--EEO Compliance Oversight, Complaints, and 
Enforcement
    D. Attachments

I. Overview

    FTA is updating its EEO Circular to clarify what recipients must do 
to comply with Titles VI and VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title 
II of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA), 49 
U.S.C. Chapter 53 (Federal Transit law), other Federal civil rights 
statutes, and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations 
in 49 CFR part 21.
    FTA issued a notice of availability of the proposed Circular and a 
request for comments in the Federal Register (81 FR 11348) on March 3, 
2016. The comment period closed May 2, 2016. We received comments from 
19 entities, including transit agencies, State DOTs, individuals, and 
the American Public Transportation Association. In addition, in 
accordance with Executive Order 12067, FTA coordinated development of 
this final Circular with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 
(EEOC). We have made clarifying edits in response to EEOC comments on 
the Circular. This notice addresses comments received and explains 
changes we made to the Circular in response to comments.

II. Chapter-by-Chapter Analysis

General Comments

    The Circular is organized topically. Each chapter begins with an 
introduction and is divided into sections and subsections. The 
organizational structure includes the text of the guidance, followed by 
a clearly delineated discussion section (as needed), which provides the 
means of complying with the law, as well as relevant good practices.
    One commenter requested a clarification of items presented as 
``good practices.'' The commenter expressed concern that the good 
practices might form the basis for a deficiency finding in a future FTA 
oversight review. To address this concern we added a statement at the 
beginning of chapter 1: ``Good practices, while encouraged, are not 
requirements. Agencies that do not utilize these practices are not 
subjecting themselves to findings in oversight reviews.''
    One commenter objected to the statement on the cover page of the 
Circular that states, ``FTA reserves the right to update this Circular 
to reflect changes in other revised or new guidance and regulations 
that undergo notice and comment, without further notice and comment on 
this Circular.'' This language appears on the cover page of all FTA 
circulars. In the event a regulatory or other cross-cutting requirement 
has changed, it has changed with a notice and comment process, so there 
is no need for a second notice and comment process in order to update 
the Circular to reflect the change. FTA encourages stakeholders to sign 
up for email updates on FTA's Web site, www.transit.dot.gov.
    One commenter suggested that FTA should monitor recipients more 
closely instead of relying on recipients' certification of compliance. 
FTA conducts reviews of all recipients on a triennial basis, conducts 
specialized EEO reviews, and investigates complaints. In addition, 
recipients' employees have the right to file complaints with the Equal 
Employment Opportunity Commission. Given the remedies available to 
employees, the large number of FTA recipients, and limited FTA 
resources, we believe our level of monitoring recipients for compliance 
is appropriate.

A. Chapter 1--Introduction and Applicability

    Chapter 1 of the Circular is an introductory chapter that reviews 
the organization of the Circular, the authority for establishing the 
Circular, and applicability to recipients.
    One commenter suggested we add ``disability,'' ``veteran status,'' 
and ``genetic information'' to the list of bases on which 
discrimination is prohibited, and we have added those terms in section 
1.2, Organization of this Circular. In section 1.3, Authorities, we 
have added the Equal Pay Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 
Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Sections 501 and 505 of 
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and Title II of the Genetic Information 
Nondiscrimination Act of 2008. In the Definitions section we have made 
clarifying edits to the terms Complainant, Concentration, Disability, 
Discrimination, Disparate Impact, Disparate Treatment, Protected Class, 
and Underutilization. We have added definitions for the terms Four-
fifths Rule, Reasonable Accommodation, Retaliation, and Sex-based 
Discrimination. Finally, we replaced the term Primary Recipient with 
the term Direct Recipient, and replaced the term One-person Rule with 
the term Whole-person Rule.
    FTA requested comments regarding a potential change to the 
threshold for Equal Employment Opportunity Program submission from the 
current standard of recipients with 50 transit-related employees, to 
recipients with 100 transit-related employees. Commenters supported 
this threshold increase, and we have adopted the increased threshold in 
the final Circular. Further, agencies with 50-99 employees will not be 
required to conduct a utilization analysis with goals and timetables or 
to submit an EEO Program to FTA. They will instead prepare and maintain 
an abbreviated EEO Program and provide it to FTA upon request or for 
any State Management Review or Triennial Review. The Circular does not 
apply to transit employers with fewer than 50 employees.
    One commenter asked FTA to clarify the 100 transit-related 
employees threshold and to more clearly define what collateral duties 
include for part-time employees. This information is in section 1.4 of 
the Circular and in a footnote in that section. When calculating the 
total number of transit-related employees, agencies are required to 
include all part-time employees and employees with collateral duties 
that support the transit program. For example, a budget analyst who 
processes payments for the transit program would be considered a 
transit-related employee.
    FTA requested comments on potential changes to the Memorandum of 
Understanding (MOU) between FTA and the Federal Highway Administration 
(FHWA). We received no comments. The Circular has been revised to 
reflect that pursuant to an MOU with FHWA, FHWA and FTA will jointly 
review, monitor, and approve State DOT EEO Programs.

B. Chapter 2--EEO Program Requirements

    Chapter 2 explains the seven required elements of an EEO Program 
for FTA review. The chapter details required language, required 
supporting documentation, the type of analysis that must be conducted, 
and the acceptable methods to report the results of that analysis.
2.1 Frequency of Update
    FTA proposed that EEO Programs be updated and submitted to FTA on a 
triennial basis or as major changes occur in the workforce or 
employment conditions. One commenter suggested FTA add the language, 
``whichever comes first'' at the end of the sentence to clarify that 
FTA requires the EEO Program to be updated at a minimum every three 
years, or sooner if conditions warrant. We have made that change.
    In addition, given that transit agencies must submit data to the 
EEOC every

[[Page 67049]]

other year, we have changed the reporting requirement to FTA to every 
four years. This should lessen the burden on transit agencies and allow 
them to report to EEOC and to FTA in the same year using the same data. 
FTA plans to publish a submission schedule for all agencies with 100 or 
more transit-related employees. In order to get all agencies on a four-
year schedule, some agencies may be required to submit an updated EEO 
Program sooner than they would otherwise have to. FTA will work to 
minimize impacts on agencies as we get all agencies on a new four-year 
schedule.
    FTA proposed removing the following sentence, which appears in the 
1988 Circular: ``At the discretion of FTA Office of Civil Rights, less 
information may be requested where the recipient's previously submitted 
EEO Program has not changed significantly.'' Several commenters 
disagreed with this proposal, asserting a requirement for a full update 
of an EEO Program when there are no significant changes places an 
unnecessary burden on small agencies that are in compliance and have 
limited staff, and is not necessary for agencies with strong EEO 
Programs or EEO Programs that have not changed significantly. In 
response to commenters, we have restored that language.
2.2.1 Statement of Policy
    FTA proposed that agencies would be required to update their EEO 
policy annually or after the naming of a new CEO/GM or EEO Officer. One 
commenter suggested that if there are no changes to the EEO policy, 
there would be no need to update it. We revised the language to require 
a review and update at least every four years, when the EEO Program is 
submitted to FTA, or after the naming of a new CEO/GM or EEO Officer.
2.2.2 Dissemination
    FTA proposed that top management officials would need to meet 
quarterly to discuss the EEO Program and its implementation. Several 
commenters objected to this frequency, asserting it would be overly 
burdensome for the agency, and recommending semiannual or annual 
meetings would be sufficient. We agreed with those comments and revised 
the Circular to reflect that the meetings take place at least 
semiannually.
    In this section, FTA proposed that agencies be required to conduct 
EEO training for all new supervisors or managers within 30 days of 
their appointment. Two commenters suggested this timeframe should be 
extended; one suggested the training take place within six months, and 
one recommended it take place within 90 days. We have revised the 
Circular to require that training for supervisors and managers be 
conducted within 90 days of their appointment.
    FTA proposed that agencies be required to meet with employees of 
protected classes and affinity groups to seek input on EEO Program 
implementation. Two commenters suggested that all employees should be 
invited to provide input on the program implementation, not just 
members of protected classes or affinity groups. We have revised the 
Circular to require meetings with all employees and affinity groups to 
seek input on EEO Program implementation.
2.2.3 Designation of Personnel
    In order to ensure impartiality and independence of the EEO 
Officer, FTA proposed that the EEO Officer would need to be separated 
from human resources officials. Several commenters objected to this 
proposal. The general consensus was that in agencies where the 
administrative staffs are small, separation of duties is impossible. 
One agency asserted that to create an EEO position separate from human 
resources would dilute the department's effectiveness to ensure EEO and 
legal compliance. Others suggested such a separation would cast 
concerns on the ability of the human resources department to protect 
equal employment opportunity. One commenter suggested FTA should not 
attempt to dictate how individual agencies avoid such conflicts of 
interest and that there would be substantial costs involved. Another 
commenter asserted the proposed separation ignored the normal function 
and role of a human resources department--to be knowledgeable about and 
enforce labor and employment laws, regulations and workplace rules--and 
that attempting to carve out functions in a way that is illogical would 
only serve to confuse all employees in the organization. In response, 
we have revised this section to state that in order to maintain the 
independence and integrity of the EEO Officer, it may be necessary to 
separate the function from human resources. Agencies are not required 
to separate EEO and HR. However, in the event the EEO Officer is part 
of HR, we have added language that requires the agency to include in 
its EEO Program a detailed method for eliminating conflicts of interest 
in complaint investigations, including a narrative describing how 
independence and integrity of the EEO process will be achieved and 
maintained.
    Similar to the separation of function between EEO and HR, FTA 
proposed that in order to maintain distance between the investigation 
of EEO complaints and defense of the agency, that the functional unit 
that reviews EEO matters be separate and apart from the functional unit 
that represents the agency in EEO complaints. Several commenters 
objected to this proposal. One commenter expressed concern about the 
phrasing of the language, specifically that attorneys rather than EEO 
Officers would represent an agency at administrative hearings. Another 
commenter expressed concern that the separation could inhibit a 
lawyer's ability to provide legal guidance on EEO requirements or could 
require the creation of two EEO offices, for internal and external 
complaints. Another commenter stated that the EEO Officer is better 
suited to report to a legal office because of the need for advice 
regarding perplexing or difficult EEO matters and the level of 
expertise needed to navigate the numerous EEO laws, regulations, and 
court rulings. In response, we clarified that the attorney who provides 
legal expertise to the EEO Officer in the investigation of a case 
cannot represent the agency in the same EEO case.
    FTA proposed that in order to ensure complaints are investigated 
effectively, those individuals charged with investigating complaints 
must have EEO investigative training. Two commenters requested 
clarification on what would constitute sufficient EEO investigative 
training for EEO Officers. We have revised the Circular to include the 
specific information that should be covered in this training.
    FTA proposed removing the requirement that EEO Officers concur on 
hires and promotions. Several commenters objected to this change. They 
asserted this requirement ensured the EEO Officer was involved in the 
process. They also suggested the removal of this function would 
undermine their ability to be part of the process. Two commenters 
supported the removal of the statement, stating the requirement was 
overly burdensome. We reinstated the statement and provided a sample 
concurrence checklist in an Attachment that clarifies what 
``concurrence'' entails.
2.2.4 Utilization Analysis
    The utilization analysis is a comparative analysis in which the 
female and minority availability for each EEO subgroup is compared with 
the current workforce representation of females and minorities.

[[Page 67050]]

    There was a concern that ``two or more races (not Hispanic or 
Latino)'' is a subcategory that is currently not collected on the EEO-4 
forms. OMB approved the change of the EEO-4 categories to be consistent 
with the EEO-1, including two or more races.
    One commenter was concerned that extending to agencies with fewer 
than 100 transit employees the requirement to complete the FTA's 
electronic database for analysis and utilization of hires, promotions, 
and personnel's applications, without additional financial resources, 
would be extremely burdensome for smaller agencies to complete and 
track. The commenter urged FTA to consider limiting the FTA analysis 
and utilization database submittal only to agencies that meet the 
threshold for the submittal of an EEO Program. In response, we revised 
the Circular to provide that agencies with 50-99 employees will not be 
required to submit a full plan to FTA every four years, and will not be 
required to conduct a utilization analysis.
    Two commenters sought clarification on how to track individuals 
with disabilities and veteran status with no baseline for availability. 
We have included language in section 2.2.6 that states we are not 
asking agencies to set a goal for veterans or persons with disabilities 
based on availability numbers. There is no whole person rule or four-
fifths analysis. The agency can set its own specific aspirational 
goals, but the Circular asks agencies to track raw numbers; for 
example, the number applied, number hired, number applied for 
promotion, and number promoted.
    One commenter requested clarification on setting department/unit/
functional area goals. The Circular states, ``Although FTA requires 
utilization data summarized for each job category, agencies are 
encouraged to compile workforce statistics for each department, job 
category, grade/rank of employee (e.g., Road Supervisor I or II, 
Mechanic A or B, etc.), and job title to include salary ranges and 
principal duties for the jobs in each subcategory.'' We did not revise 
the Circular based on this comment, as the Circular states setting 
goals based on workforce statistics for each department, job category, 
grade/rank of employee is an encouraged good practice. It is not a 
requirement.
2.2.5 Goals and Timetables
    One commenter asserted that setting long-term and short-term goals 
and timetables for each individual minority group, broken down by 
specific racial/ethnic subcategories for men and women, could only be 
achieved by conducting targeted recruitments, which could be perceived 
as discriminatory in California under the Fair Employment and Housing 
Act (FEHA). FTA did not revise the proposal, as the short-term and 
long-term goals are aspirational goals based on identified 
underutilization and the results of the employment practices analysis.
2.2.6 Assessment of Employment Practices
    FTA proposed that agencies be required to describe their efforts to 
locate, qualify, and train employees in protected classes. One 
commenter asserted all employees, not just employees of a protected 
class, should be able to receive training and that any action to 
locate, qualify, and train employees in protected classes could be 
perceived as discriminatory under FEHA. Certainly all employees should 
be able to avail themselves of training; the only documentation FTA 
requires in the EEO Program is those efforts to locate, qualify, and 
train employees in protected classes.
    Another commenter asked for clarification on whether or not test 
validation documentation is required for all candidate selections. As 
clarification, test validation is completed per test, not per 
candidate. The commenter also asked FTA to clarify or remove the 
requirement that agencies provide a narrative of current seniority 
policies and procedures for union and non-union workers. We have 
revised the Circular to provide that agencies must provide a narrative 
for union and non-union workers if the seniority policies are 
different. In order to conduct a qualitative assessment of seniority 
practices to determine any potential disparate impact, a narrative must 
be provided.
    One commenter noted that revising union agreements is a complex 
process that cannot be done unilaterally by an agency. In response, we 
revised the Circular to state, ``When agencies are negotiating or 
amending union agreements, FTA requires agencies to review and revise 
the agreements wherever current provisions are identified as barriers 
to equal employment.'' The commenter further asserted, with regard to 
disciplinary procedures and termination practices, that it would be 
unreasonable to require agencies to use the ``same'' standard for 
determining when a person will be demoted, disciplined, or laid off in 
light of collectively bargained-for procedures and practices, and in 
light of state civil service law provisions governing the appointment, 
promotion and continuance of employment of certain agency employees 
(including layoffs). We have not revised the Circular in response to 
this comment, as the Circular provides for placing employees in 
similarly situated groupings (e.g., subject to the same schedule of 
disciplinary charges) and requires separate analyses for employees 
subject to different disciplinary processes.
2.2.7 Monitoring and Reporting
    FTA proposed that agencies would be required to evaluate their EEO 
Programs at least quarterly. Several commenters objected to meeting 
with management quarterly to discuss the EEO Program and its 
implementation. They asserted it would be overly burdensome for the 
agency. We revised the Circular to reflect the evaluation should take 
place, at a minimum, semiannually.
    Some commenters suggested that unit managers should not have access 
to EEO information and that tracking this information is entirely a 
human resources function. There was also concern that reviewing this 
information with all levels of management could breach confidentiality 
for smaller agencies. The Circular has been revised to say all 
``program'' EEO-related meetings should be discussed. The meetings that 
are conducted with managers are to discuss the agency's progress in 
terms of meeting their EEO Program goals and requirements, not to 
discuss individual EEO complaints.
    One commenter questioned whether FTA is requiring the agency to 
track the agenda and outcome of every single meeting that the EEO 
Officer has with the CEO/GM, with any management official, and with 
human resources, with a concern on resource management. We are revising 
the Circular to provide documentation of meetings where EEO is 
officially discussed; for example, official EEO training and official 
meetings with management to report on EEO Program progress and plans of 
actions. There is no need to document every conversation.
    FTA proposed that one element of a successful EEO Program is to, 
``Produce documentation that supports actions to implement the plan for 
minority and female job applicants or employees and informs management 
of the program's effectiveness.'' One commenter suggested replacing 
``for minority and female'' with ``to improve diversity of.'' FTA did 
not adopt this suggestion. We believe it is important to specifically 
state ``minority and female'' as opposed to the more general ``improve 
diversity,'' in order to ensure agencies are documenting their efforts 
appropriately. FTA proposed that one of the EEO Program attachments 
would be an

[[Page 67051]]

organization chart showing the reporting relationships of all 
positions. One commenter suggested the organizational chart section 
should be revised so that it did not include the names of all 
employees. We have revised the Circular to clarify that only directors, 
department heads, and executive leadership are to be named on the 
organization chart.
    FTA sought comment on how long it would take to develop an EEO 
Program with the requirements set out in chapter 2 of the Circular. FTA 
also sought suggestions from recipients regarding how to use 
information technology to decrease the amount of time it takes to 
develop an EEO Program. One commenter suggested that the Circular has 
new data collection requirements that will require coordination with 
departmental units such as human resources and information technology. 
The commenter sought a 12-month grace period before new statistical 
data is required. As stated above, FTA will be drafting a new schedule 
for quadrennial submission of EEO Programs to FTA. FTA will work with 
agencies that find themselves on the ``earlier'' side of the schedule 
and that may need to update their internal practices in order to 
develop an effective EEO Program.

C. Chapter 3--EEO Compliance Oversight, Complaints, and Enforcement

    One commenter requested additional clarity and definition of 
factors and concerns that may trigger a discretionary review. We 
revised the Circular to clarify the six factors that contribute to the 
selection for a civil rights specialized review.

D. Attachments

    In the proposed Circular, FTA included several Attachments: 
Attachment 1, References; Attachment 2, Sample EEO Policy Statement; 
and Attachment 3, Sample Excel Charts. We did not receive comments on 
any of the Attachments. In response to comments that the EEO Officer 
should concur in the hiring and promotion process, we have added a new 
Attachment, Sample Concurrence Checklist. Additionally, we added a copy 
of the EEO-4 form, Program Submission checklist, EEO Program checklist. 
The Circular now includes: Attachment 1, Sample Policy Statement; 
Attachment 2, Sample Concurrence Checklist; Attachment 3, EEO-4 Form; 
Attachment 4, Sample Employment Practices and Utilization Analysis 
Excel Charts; Attachment 5, EEO Program Submission Checklist; 
Attachment 6, Sample EEO Program Checklist; Attachment 7, References.

Carolyn Flowers,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-23505 Filed 9-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-57-P