Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules 57 

scoring keys. Disclosure of the 

individual item responses and scoring 

keys will compromise the objectivity 

and fairness of the test as well as the 

validity of future tests resulting in the 

Department being unable to use the 

testing battery as an individual 

assessment tool. 

Dated: December 21, 2010. 

Morgan F. Park, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2010–33030 Filed 12–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

National Park Service 

36 CFR Part 7 

RIN 1024–AD89 

Special Regulation: Areas of the 

National Park System, National Capital 

Region 

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The National Park Service 

(NPS) proposes to amend the 

regulations on demonstrations and 

special events for the National Capital 

Region. This proposed rule would revise 

the definition of ‘‘demonstration’’ as 

well as specify the conditions under 

which solicitation of gifts, money, 

goods, or services could occur. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

March 4, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit your 

comments, identified by Regulatory 

Information Number 1024–AD89, by 

any of the following methods: 

—Federal rulemaking portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

—Mail or hand delivery: National Park 

Service, Regional Director, Division of 

Park Programs, 1100 Ohio Drive, SW., 

Room 128, Washington, DC 20242. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robbin Owen, Chief, Division of Park 

Programs, National Park Service, 

National Capital Region, 1100 Ohio 

Drive, SW., Room 128, Washington, DC 

20242. Telephone: (202) 619–7225. Fax: 

(202) 401–2430. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Revise the Definition of ‘‘Demonstration’’ 

This proposed rule would revise the 

definition of demonstration at 36 CFR 

7.96 (g)(1)(i) by eliminating the term 

‘‘intent or propensity’’ where it appears 

in the definition and replace it with the 

term ‘‘reasonably likely.’’ In Boardley v. 

Department of the Interior, 605 F. Supp. 

2d 8 (D.D.C. 2009) the United States 

District Court for the District of 

Columbia commented on the 

demonstration definition for the 

National Capital Region under 36 CFR 

7.96 (g)(1)(i). The Court commented the 

definition could raise problems, because 

it allowed NPS officials to restrict 

speech based on their determination 

that a person intended to draw a crowd 

with their conduct. Such a 

determination could easily rest on 

impermissible grounds, such as an 

official’s perception that certain 

expression is controversial or 

inappropriate, which would be a 

content-based decision, impermissible 

under the First Amendment. While the 

NPS has not applied the regulation in 

such an impermissible manner, and has 

since issued a clarifying memorandum 

to preclude such a determination, this 

proposed rule would revise the 

definition of demonstration to minimize 

any possibility of a decision based on 

impermissible grounds. 

Amendment of the Solicitation 

Regulation 

This proposed rule also would amend 

the provision regarding soliciting, in 

order to be consistent with the United 

States Court of Appeals for the District 

of Columbia decision in ISKCON of 

Potomac v. Kennedy, 61 F.3d 949 (DC 

Cir. 1995). 

In ISKCON of Potomac, the Court of 

Appeals held that the NPS’s regulatory 

ban of soliciting, which the NPS 

traditionally construed as applying only 

to the in-person solicitation of 

immediate donations, was not ‘‘narrowly 

tailored.’’ The Court recognized that: 

* * *[t]he conduct of a special event 

within a small, well-defined permit area will 

have some effect on the ambiance of the Mall. 

But we cannot see how allowing in-person 

solicitations within the permit area will add 

to whatever adverse impact will result from 

the special event itself. The effects of 

solicitation will be confined to the permit 

area, and those who wish to escape them may 

simply steer clear of the authorized 

demonstration or special event. 61 F.3d at 

956. 

The Court also said: 

Our holding allows only those individuals 

or groups participating in an authorized 

demonstration or special event to solicit 

donations within the confines of a restricted 

permit area such as that assigned to ISKCON. 

It does not require the NPS to let rampant 

panhandling go unchecked. 61 F.3d at 956. 

Following the ISKCON of Potomac 

decision, as an interim measure, the 

NPS posted a notice at its Washington, 

DC, National Capital Region Division of 

Park Programs permit office as well as 

in the Superintendent’s Compendium of 

regulations for the National Mall and 

Memorial Parks, stating that soliciting 

would be allowed if it occurred within 

the confines of a permit area as part of 

a permitted ongoing activity. The 

soliciting regulation itself, however, also 

must be amended. 

Consistent with ISKCON of Potomac, 

this proposed amendment would allow 

individuals or groups who are 

participating in a permitted 

demonstration or special event to solicit 

donations within the confines of a 

restricted permit area. Such soliciting is 

authorized only when provided for in a 

permit. Groups seeking to solicit 

donations as part of a demonstration or 

special event will need to describe the 

activities in their permit application. 

This proposed rule also formalizes the 

long-standing view that soliciting is 

limited to the in-person soliciting of 

immediate donations. 

This proposed rule deals with 

soliciting and not sales. Any attempt to 

offer or sell items, whether directly or 

by the use of deceit, is governed by the 

NPS sales regulation, at 36 CFR 7.96 (k), 

which limits items to be sold on park 

lands to books, newspapers, leaflets, 

pamphlets, buttons, and bumper 

stickers. As the NPS explained it its 

prefatory statement to its sales 

regulation, at 60 FR 17648 (1995), 

* * * restricted merchandise cannot be 

‘‘given away’’ and a ‘‘donation accepted’’ or 

one item ‘‘given away’’ in return for the 

purchase of another item; such transactions 

amount to sales. 

Finally, it has been the NPS’s longstanding application of its regulations 

that demonstrations and special events, 

whether under permit or not, are not 

allowed in the restricted areas at 36 CFR 

7.96 (g)(3)(ii). To better ensure that 

everyone fully understands that 

demonstrations and special events, with 

or without a permit, are not allowed in 

these restricted areas, NPS proposes to 

amend its introductory sentence to 

clearly indicate that no demonstrations 

or special events are allowed in the 

designated restricted areas. 

Compliance with Other Laws, Executive 

Orders, and Department Policy 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

(Executive Order 12866) 

This document is not a significant 

rule and the Office of Management and 

Budget, (OMB), has not reviewed this 

rule under Executive Order 12866. 

(1) This rule will not have an effect of 

$100 million or more on the economy. 

It will not adversely affect in a material 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
58 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

way the economy, productivity, 

competition, jobs, the environment, 

public health or safety, or State, local, 

or Tribal governments or communities. 

(2) This rule will not create a serious 

inconsistency or otherwise interfere 

with an action taken or planned by 

another agency. The rule only effects 

management and operations of National 

Park Service areas within the National 

Capital Region. 

(3) This rule does not alter the 

budgetary effects of entitlements, grants, 

user fees, or loan programs or the rights 

or obligations of their recipients. 

(4) This rule does not raise novel legal 

or policy issues. The rule modifies 

existing NPS regulations to be 

consistent with recent Federal Court 

decisions. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

The Department of the Interior 

certifies that this document will not 

have a significant economic effect on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). 

The rule expands opportunities for 

individuals and organizations to solicit 

funds, goods or services associated with 

a special event for which a permit has 

been issued. Other organizations with 

interest in the rule will not be effected 

economically. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act (SBREFA) 

This rule is not a major rule under 5 

U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. 

This rule: 

a. Does not have an annual effect on 

the economy of $100 million or more. 

b. Will not cause a major increase in 

costs or prices for consumers, 

individual industries, Federal, State, or 

local government agencies, or 

geographic regions. 

c. Does not have significant adverse 

effects on competition, employment, 

investment, productivity, innovation, or 

the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to 

compete with foreign-based enterprises. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This rule does not impose an 

unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

Tribal governments or the private sector 

of more than $100 million per year. The 

rule does not have a significant or 

unique effect on State, local, or Tribal 

governments or the private sector. A 

statement containing the information 

required by the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act, (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not 

required. 

Takings (Executive Order 12630) 

Under the criteria in Executive Order 

12630, this rule does not have 

significant takings implications. It 

pertains specifically to operation and 

management of locations within the 

NPS–National Capital Region. A takings 

implication assessment is not required. 

Federalism (Executive Order 13132) 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13132, the rule does not have sufficient 

federalism implications to warrant the 

preparation of summary impact 

statement. A Federalism summary 

impact statement is not required. 

Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order 

12988) 

This rule complies with the 

requirements of Executive Order 12988. 

Specifically, this rule: 

(a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a) 

requiring that all regulations be 

reviewed to eliminate errors and 

ambiguity and be written to minimize 

litigation; and 

(b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) 

requiring that all regulations be written 

in clear language and contain clear legal 

standards. 

Consultation With Indian Tribes 

(Executive Order 13175) 

Under the criteria in Executive Order 

13175, we have evaluated this rule and 

determined that it has no potential 

effects on federally recognized Indian 

Tribes. The rule only applies to 

management and operation of NPS areas 

within the National Capital Region. 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

The Office of Management and Budget 

has approved the information 

collections in this rule and has assigned 

control number 1024–0021, expiring on 

November 30, 2013. We estimate the 

burden associated with this information 

collection to be 3⁄4 hour. The 

information collection activities are 

necessary for the public to obtain 

benefits in the form of special park use 

permits. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) 

This rule does not constitute a major 

Federal action significantly affecting the 

quality of the human environment. A 

detailed statement under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 is not 

required because the rule is covered by 

a categorical exclusion. We have 

determined that the proposed rule is 

categorically excluded under 516 DM 

12.5 A (10) insofar as it is a modification 

of existing NPS regulations that does not 

increase public use to the extent of 

compromising the nature and character 

of the area or causing physical damage 

to it. Further, the rule will not result in 

the introduction of incompatible uses 

which might compromise the nature 

and characteristics of the area or cause 

physical damage to it. Finally, the rule 

will not cause conflict with adjacent 

ownerships or land uses, or cause a 

nuisance to adjacent owners or 

occupants. 

We have also determined that the rule 

does not involve any of the 

extraordinary circumstances listed in 43 

CFR 46.215 that would require further 

analysis under the National 

Environmental Policy Act. 

Information Quality Act (IQA) 

In developing this rule we did not 

conduct or use a study, experiment, or 

survey requiring peer review under the 

Information Quality Act (Pub. L. 106– 

554). 

Effects on the Energy Supply (Executive 

Order 13211) 

This rule is not a significant energy 

action under the definition in Executive 

Order 13211. A Statement of Energy 

Effects is not required. 

Clarity of This Regulation 

We are required by Executive Orders 

12866 and 12988 and by the 

Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 

1998, to write all rules in plain 

language. This means that each rule we 

publish must: 

(a) Be logically organized; 

(b) Use the active voice to address 

readers directly; 

(c) Use clear language rather than 

jargon; 

(d) Be divided into short sections and 

sentences; and 

(e) Use lists and tables wherever 

possible. 

If you feel that we have not met these 

requirements, send us comments by one 

of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES

section. To better help us revise the 

rule, your comments should be as 

specific as possible. For example, you 

should tell us the numbers of the 

sections or paragraphs that are unclearly 

written, which sections or sentences are 

too long, the sections where you feel 

lists or tables would be useful, etc. 

Public Participation 

All submissions received must 

include the agency name and docket 

number or Regulatory Information 

Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http://www.

regulations.gov. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules 59 

comments received, go to http://www.

regulations.gov and enter ‘‘1024–AD89’’ 

in the ‘‘Keyword or ID’’ search box. 

Public Availability of Comments 

Before including your address, phone 

number, e-mail address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment including your 

personal identifying information may be 

made publicly available at any time. 

While you can ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7 

District of Columbia, National parks, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

National Park Service proposes to 

amend 36 CFR part 7 as set forth below: 

PART 7—SPECIAL REGULATIONS, 

AREAS OF THE NATIONAL PARK 

SYSTEM 

1. The authority citation for part 7 is 

revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1, 3, 9a, 460(q), 

462(k); Sec. 7.96 also issued under 36 U.S.C. 

501–511, DC Code 10–137 (2001) and DC 

Code 50–2201.07 (2001). 

2. In § 7.96: 

A. Revise paragraph (g)(1)(i); 

B. Revise paragraph (g)(3)(ii) 

introductory text; 

C. Revise paragraph (g)(3)(ii)(D); 

D. Add paragraph (g)(3)(ii)(E); 

E. Remove maps following paragraph 

(g)(7); and 

F. Revise paragraph (h). 

The revisions and addition read as 

follows: 

§ 7.96 National Capital Region. 

* * * * * 

(g) Demonstrations and special 

events—(1) Definitions (i) The term 

‘‘demonstration’’ includes 

demonstrations, picketing, 

speechmaking, marching, holding vigils 

or religious services and all other like 

forms of conduct which involve the 

communication or expression of views 

or grievances, engaged in by one or 

more persons, the conduct of which is 

reasonably likely to draw a crowd or 

onlookers. This term does not include 

casual park use by visitors or tourists 

that is not reasonably likely to attract a 

crowd or onlookers. 

* * * * * 

(3) * * * 

(ii) Other park areas. Demonstrations 

and special events are not allowed in 

the following other park areas: 

* * * * * 

(D) The Vietnam Veterans Memorial, 

except for official annual Memorial Day 

and Veterans Day commemorative 

ceremonies. 

(E) Maps of the park areas designated 

in this paragraph are as follows. The 

darkened portions of the diagrams show 

the areas where demonstrations or 

special events are prohibited. 

BILLING CODE 4312–52–P 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
60 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALSEP03JA11.012</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules 61 

BILLING CODE 4312–52–C 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALSEP03JA11.013</GPH>
62 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

* * * * * 

(h) Soliciting under permit. (1) The inperson soliciting or demanding gifts, 

money, goods or services is prohibited, 

unless it occurs as part of a permit 

issued for a demonstration or special 

event. 

(2) Persons permitted to solicit must 

not: 

(i) Give false or misleading 

information regarding their purposes or 

affiliations; 

(ii) Give false or misleading 

information whether any item is 

available without donation. 

* * * * * 

Dated: December 22, 2010. 

Thomas L. Strickland, 

Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and 

Parks. 

[FR Doc. 2010–33071 Filed 12–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4312–52–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Office of Federal Contract Compliance 

Programs 

41 CFR Parts 60–1 and 60–2 

RIN 1250–ZA00 

Interpretive Standards for Systemic 

Compensation Discrimination and 

Voluntary Guidelines for SelfEvaluation of Compensation Practices 

Under Executive Order 11246; Notice 

of Proposed Rescission 

AGENCY: Office of Federal Contract 

Compliance Programs, Labor. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rescission. 

SUMMARY: The Office of Federal Contract 

Compliance Programs (OFCCP) is 

proposing to rescind two guidance 

documents addressing compensation 

discrimination: Interpreting 

Nondiscrimination Requirements of 

Executive Order 11246 with respect to 

Systemic Compensation Discrimination 

(Standards) and Voluntary Guidelines 

for Self-Evaluation of Compensation 

Practices for Compliance with Executive 

Order 11246 with respect to Systemic 

Compensation Discrimination 

(Voluntary Guidelines). OFCCP is 

proposing to rescind the Standards 

which have limited OFCCP’s ability to 

effectively investigate, analyze and 

identify compensation discrimination. 

In so doing, OFCCP will continue to 

adhere to the principles of Title VII of 

the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended 

(Title VII) in investigating compensation 

discrimination and will reinstitute 

flexibility in its use of investigative 

approaches and tools. OFCCP also 

proposes to establish procedures for 

investigating compensation 

discrimination through the traditional 

means of using its compliance manual, 

directives and other staff guidance. 

OFCCP is proposing to rescind the 

Voluntary Guidelines because they are 

largely unused by the Federal 

Government contracting community and 

have not been an effective enforcement 

strategy. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 4, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by number 1250–ZNE, by any 

of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 693–1304 (for comments 

of 6 pages or fewer). 

• Mail: Director, Division of Policy, 

Planning, and Program Development, 

Office of Federal Contract Compliance 

Programs, Room N3422, 200 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20210. 

Receipt of submissions will not be 

acknowledged; however, the sender may 

request confirmation that a submission 

has been received by telephoning 

OFCCP at (202) 693–0102 (voice) or 

(202) 693–1337 (TTY) (these are not tollfree numbers). 

All comments received, including any 

personal information provided, will be 

available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov and for public 

inspection during normal business 

hours at Room C3325, 200 Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. 

Individuals needing assistance to review 

comments will be provided with 

appropriate aids such as readers or print 

magnifiers. Copies of this Notice of 

Proposed Rescission will be made 

available in the following formats: Large 

print; Braille; electronic file on 

computer disk; and audiotape. To 

schedule an appointment to review the 

comments and/or to obtain this Notice 

of Proposed Rescission in an alternate 

format, contact OFCCP at the telephone 

numbers or address listed above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Director, Division of Policy, Planning, 

and Program Development, Office of 

Federal Contract Compliance Programs, 

200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room 

N3422, Washington, DC 20210. 

Telephone: (202) 693–0102 (voice) or 

(202) 693–1337 (TTY). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Department of Labor’s OFCCP 

enforces Executive Order 11246 which 

requires Federal Government 

contractors and subcontractors to 

provide equal employment opportunity 

through affirmative action and 

nondiscrimination based on race, color, 

national origin, religion, or sex. 

Compensation discrimination is one 

form of discrimination prohibited by the 

Executive Order. 

OFCCP enforces contractors’ 

compliance with this obligation 

primarily by conducting compliance 

evaluations. (See 41 CFR 60–1.20.) 

OFCCP’s longstanding policy is to 

follow Title VII principles when 

conducting analyses of potential 

discrimination under Executive Order 

11246, including compensation 

discrimination. Compensation 

discrimination may occur on an 

individual basis, or systemically, that is, 

it is widespread in an organization due 

to discriminatory compensation 

systems. OFCCP traditionally has 

established procedures for investigating 

compensation discrimination, as well as 

other forms of discrimination, through 

instructions for its compliance officers 

contained in the OFCCP Federal 

Contract Compliance Manual (FCCM), 

directives and other staff guidance 

materials. 

Identifying and remedying 

compensation discrimination has been 

an important part of OFCCP compliance 

efforts for many years. Concerns about 

compensation discrimination led 

OFCCP in Calendar Year (CY) 2000 to 

begin requiring contractors to submit 

compensation data requested in the 

scheduling letter at the outset of a 

compliance evaluation as a matter of 

course and as part of the data reported 

in a new Equal Opportunity Survey, 

which covered contractors were 

required to submit to OFCCP. (The 

Scheduling Letter was approved under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act OMB NO. 

1215–0072; see 65 FR 68022, 68036 

(November 13, 2000) for the notice 

regarding the Equal Opportunity 

Survey.) In CY 2000, OFCCP also began 

requiring contractors to proactively 

conduct in-depth analyses of their 

compensation systems to ensure that 

those systems were not discriminatory. 

(See 41 CFR 60–2.17(b)(3).) 

OFCCP changed its approach to 

investigating compensation 

discrimination in 2006. On June 16, 

2006, OFCCP published in the Federal 

Register two final guidance documents 

related to identifying compensation 

discrimination under Executive Order 

11246 that contained interpretations of 

OFCCP regulations and Title VII 

principles: Interpreting 

Nondiscrimination Requirements of 

Executive Order 11246 with respect to 

Systemic Compensation Discrimination 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS