49398 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Utah from the National Priorities List 

(NPL) and requests public comments on 

this proposed action. The NPL, 

promulgated pursuant to section 105 of 

the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is 

an appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and 

the State of Utah, through the Utah 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(UDEQ), have determined that all 

appropriate response actions under 

CERCLA, other than operation, 

maintenance, and five-year reviews, 

have been completed. However, this 

deletion does not preclude future 

actions under Superfund. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

September 9, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID no. EPA–HQ– 

SFUND–2000–0003, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: waterman.erna@epa.gov. 

• Fax: 303 312–7151. 

• Mail: Erna Waterman, Remedial 

Project Manager, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 8, EPR–SR, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129. 

• Hand delivery: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 8, EPR–SR, 

1595 Wynkoop. Denver, CO. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–2000– 

0003. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statue. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in the 

hard copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at: 

U.S. EPA, Region 8, Records Center, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

Colorado 80202–1129, (303) 312–6473 

Hours: M–F 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. 

Tooele City Library, 128 West Vine 

Street, Tooele, Utah 84074, (435) 882– 

2182. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erna 

Waterman, Remedial Project Manager, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 8, 8EPR–SR, 1595 Wynkoop 

Street, Denver, CO 08202–1129, (303) 

312–6762 e-mail: 

Waterman.Erna@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ Section of 

today’s Federal Register, we are 

publishing a direct final Notice of 

Deletion of International Smelting and 

Refining Superfund Site without prior 

Notice of Intent to Delete because we 

view this as a noncontroversial revision 

and anticipate no adverse comment. We 

have explained our reasons for this 

deletion in the preamble to the direct 

final Notice of Deletion, and those 

reasons are incorporated herein. If we 

receive no adverse comment(s) on this 

deletion action, we will not take further 

action on this Notice of Intent to Delete. 

If we receive adverse comment(s), we 

will withdraw the direct final Notice of 

Deletion, and it will not take effect. We 

will, as appropriate, address all public 

comments in a subsequent final Notice 

of Deletion based on this Notice of 

Intent to Delete. We will not institute a 

second comment period on this Notice 

of Intent to Delete. Any parties 

interested in commenting must do so at 

this time. 

For additional information, see the 

direct final Notice of Deletion which is 

located in the Rules section of this 

Federal Register. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous 

waste, Hazardous substances, 

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Superfund, Water 

pollution control, Water supply. 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 

9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 

1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923; 

3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193. 

Dated: July 8, 2011. 

James B. Martin, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2011–20292 Filed 8–9–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Office of Federal Contract Compliance 

Programs 

41 CFR Parts 60–1 

RIN 1250–AA03 

Non-Discrimination in Compensation; 

Compensation Data Collection Tool 

AGENCY: Office of Federal Contract 

Compliance Programs. 

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Office of Federal Contract 

Compliance Programs (OFCCP) is 

issuing this Advance Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking in order to invite the public 

to provide input on the development 

and implementation of a compensation 

data collection tool. Possible uses for 

the collected data include generating 

insight into potential problems of 

compensation discrimination at the 

establishment level that warrant further 

review or evaluation by OFCCP or 

contractor self-audit. OFCCP could use 

the data collected by the tool to conduct 

analyses at the establishment level, as 

well as to identify and analyze industry 

trends, Federal contractors’ 

compensation practices and potential 

equal employment-related issues. 

OFCCP is issuing this Advanced 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to 

solicit comments from interested parties 

as early as possible in the development 

process of this new data collection tool. 

There will, of course, be an additional 

opportunity to comment following the 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 49399 

1OFCCP also enforces Section 503 of the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. 

793 and the Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment 

Assistance Act of 1974, as amended, 38 U.S.C. 

4212. 

2See 41 CFR 60–2.17(b)(3). 

3Abt Associates Inc., An Evaluation of OFCCP’s 

Equal Opportunity Survey, p. 39, (Feb. 2005). 

4See 71 FR 53032 (Sept. 8, 2006). 

5Calculations from U.S. Census Bureau, Current 

Population Survey, 2010 Annual Social and 

Economic Supplement, Table PINC–05: Work 

Experience in 2009—People 15 Years Old and Over 

Continued 

publication of the Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking. However, to maximize the 

opportunity to participate in the 

rulemaking process, OFCCP strongly 

encourages all interested parties to take 

this opportunity to submit any ideas, 

comments or concerns which OFCCP 

should consider in the course of 

designing this compensation data 

collection tool. OFCCP is especially 

interested in the nature of data that 

would be most useful for analysis, and 

any practical implementation issues. 

DATES: All comments must be received 

on or before October 11, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by RIN number 1250–AA03, 

by any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail and Hand delivery/Courier: 

Debra A. Carr, Director, Division of 

Policy, Planning, and Program 

Development, Office of Federal Contract 

Compliance Programs, Room C–3325, 

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) 693–0103 (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 C–3325, 200 Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. 

People who require assistance to review 

comments will be provided with 

appropriate aids such as readers or print 

magnifiers. Copies of this Advance 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking will be 

made available in the following formats: 

Large print, Braille, electronic file or 

computer disk, and audiotape. To 

schedule an appointment to review the 

comments or this Advance Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking in an alternate 

format, contact OFCCP at the telephone 

numbers or address listed above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Debra A. Carr, Director, Division of 

Policy, Planning and Program 

Development, Office of Federal Contract 

Compliance Programs, 200 Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Room C–3325, 

Washington, DC 20210. Telephone: 

(202) 693–0103 (voice) or (202) 693– 

1337 (TTY). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Department of Labor’s Office of Federal 

Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP 

or Agency) enforces Executive Order 

11246 (Executive Order) which requires 

Federal Government contractors and 

subcontractors to provide equal 

employment opportunity through 

affirmative action and 

nondiscrimination based on race, color, 

national origin, religion, and sex.1

Compensation discrimination is one 

form of discrimination prohibited by the 

Executive Order. 

Identifying and remedying 

compensation discrimination remains 

an important part of OFCCP’s 

compliance efforts. In 2000, concerns 

about compensation discrimination led 

OFCCP to require contractors to 

proactively conduct in-depth analyses 

of their compensation systems to ensure 

that those systems were not 

discriminatory.2 That same year, OFCCP 

began requiring contractors to submit 

compensation data requested in the 

scheduling letter at the outset of a 

compliance evaluation to permit the 

agency to evaluate compensation 

practices as a matter of course in 

reviews. 

In 2000, OFCCP also initiated a 

reporting requirement, the Equal 

Opportunity Survey (EO Survey), which 

required a subset of contractors to 

submit information to OFCCP 

independent of OFCCP compliance 

evaluations. 65 FR 68022, 68046 

(November 13, 2000). The EO Survey 

required contractors to submit 

information about personnel activities, 

compensation and tenure, and certain 

information about the contractor’s 

affirmative action program. The EO 

Survey had three major objectives: 

(1) To increase compliance with equal 

opportunity requirements by improving 

contractor self-awareness and 

encouraging self-evaluations; 

(2) To improve the deployment of 

scarce federal government resources to 

those contractors that were most likely 

to be out of compliance; 

(3) To increase agency efficiency by 

building on the tiered-review process 

already accomplished by OFCCP’s 

regulatory reform efforts, resulting in 

better resource allocation. 

65 FR 68039. 

From its inception, OFCCP was 

concerned about verifying the utility 

and efficiency of the EO Survey. The 

development of the EO Survey began in 

March 1998, with initial field testing 

beginning in August 1999. In April 

2000, a pilot EO Survey was sent to 

approximately 7,000 contractors. After 

receipt of the pilot EO Survey 

responses, OFCCP commissioned a 

study to determine whether the pilot EO 

Survey results could be used to predict 

whether a contractor would have 

findings of non-compliance. Bendick & 

Egan Economic Consultants, Inc., The 

Equal Opportunity Survey: Analysis of 

a First Wave of Survey Responses (Sept. 

2000)(Bendick Report). The report 

concluded that the potential increases 

in OFCCP efficiency and effectiveness 

through use of the EO Survey could be 

substantial and recommended that use 

of the survey be expanded and refined. 

Bendick Report at 31. 

OFCCP mailed 53,000 EO Surveys 

between December 2000 and March 

2001, and 10,000 per year from 2001– 

2004. OFCCP commissioned another 

study to determine whether the EO 

Survey could be used to develop a 

model that more effectively targets 

contractors who engage in systemic 

discrimination. The report, issued in 

2005, concluded that the EO Survey had 

little predictive value as a tool for 

indicating discrimination or noncompliance.3 All of these studies have 

data limitations that undermine drawing 

firm conclusions about the true 

predictive power of the EO Survey. 

However, based primarily on this 2005 

report, OFCCP rescinded the EO Survey 

in 2006.4

The purpose of the proposed new tool 

is to provide insight into potential 

problems of pay discrimination by 

contractors that warrant further review 

or evaluation by OFCCP or contractor 

self-audit. Accordingly, it is envisioned 

primarily as a screening tool, although 

it may also have research value. The 

tool would allow OFCCP to effectively 

and efficiently identify supply and 

service contractors whose compensation 

data indicates that further investigation 

is necessary to ensure compliance with 

the non-discrimination requirements of 

the Executive Order and would provide 

contractors with a self-assessment tool 

that may be used periodically to 

evaluate the effects of their employee 

compensation decisions. The data 

collected through this tool may be used 

to identify contractors for compensation 

focused reviews as well as full 

compliance reviews. Women still earn 

only 77 cents for each dollar earned by 

a man.5 The wage gap is even greater for 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
49400 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

by Total Money Earnings in 2009, Age, Race, 

Hispanic Origin, and Sex, available athttp:// 

www.census.gov/hhes/www/cpstables/032010/ 

perinc/toc.htm (last visited Dec. 7, 2010). 

6 Id. 

7Explaining Trends in the Gender Wage Gap, A 

Report by the Council of Economic Advisers (June 

1998). 

8See O’Neill, June E., ‘‘The Gender Gap in Wages, 

Circa 2000,’’ American Economic Review (May 

2003). 

9 Jacobsen, Joyce P., The Economics of Gender 

(2007). 

10 Jacobsen, supra; see also, e.g., Blau, Francine D. 

and Kahn, Lawrence M.,’’The U.S. Gender Pay Gap 

in the 1990s: Slowing Convergence,’’ 60 Industrial 

and Labor Relations Review 45 (2006). 

11 Id. 

12Altonji, Joseph G. and Blank, Rebecca M., 

‘‘Race and Gender in the Labor Market,’’ in 

Ashenfelter, Orley and Card, David, eds., Handbook 

of Labor Economics (1999). 

13Employer Information Report EEO–1: EEO–1 

Job Classification Guide, available at http:// 

www.eeoc.gov/employers/eeo1survey/upload/ 

jobclassguide.pdf (last visited July 13, 2011). 

14See 41 CFR Part 60–2. 

15 Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, Standard Occupational Classification, 

available at http://www.bls.gov/soc/ (last visited 

July 13, 2011). 

16 Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2010– 

11 Edition, available at http://www.bls.gov/oco/ 

oco2007.htm (last visited July 13, 2011). 

women of color: non-Hispanic white 

women make 75 cents for every dollar 

earned by a non-Hispanic white man, 

while African-American women make 

62 cents and Latinas make 53 cents for 

every dollar earned by a non-Hispanic 

white man.6 Potentially nondiscriminatory factors can explain some 

of these differences. Even so, after 

controlling for differences in skills and 

job characteristics, women still earn less 

than men.7 Some scholars find that 

these differences can be explained, to 

some extent, by differences in education 

and prior labor market experience.8

Others identify job segregation as an 

important cause of the pay gap.9

Ultimately, the research literature still 

finds that an unexplained gap exists 

even after accounting for potential 

explanations.10 Moreover, research 

literature finds that the narrowing of the 

pay gap has slowed since the 1980’s.11

To the extent that these factors, such as 

type of job or amount of continuous 

labor market experience, are also 

influenced by discrimination, the 

‘‘unexplained’’ difference may 

understate the true effect of 

discrimination. In addition to the 

gender pay gap, scholars have found 

race and ethnicity-based pay gaps that 

put workers of color at a disadvantage.12

As a result, eliminating compensation 

discrimination by Federal contractors 

has been, and continues to be, a priority 

issue for OFCCP. 

Before developing a proposed 

regulation, OFCCP seeks comments 

from members of the public on issues 

relating to the scope, content and format 

of the data collection tool, as well as 

suggestions for ensuring that the tool 

will be an effective and efficient means 

of identifying contractors for review. In 

addition, OFCCP will conduct webbased and Town Hall listening sessions 

to provide an opportunity for 

stakeholders to offer suggestions and 

recommendations related to the scope, 

content and format of the data collection 

tool in the months ahead. Notices will 

be placed on OFCCP’s Web site and 

email alerts sent out in advance. In 

developing a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking and the data collection tool 

itself, OFCCP will take into 

consideration comments provided in 

response to this Advance Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (‘‘ANPRM’’) and 

during the various listening sessions. 

The purpose of this ANPRM, which is 

the first step toward publishing a Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking, is to request 

comments and data from the public on 

the following issues. 

Request for Comments 

OFCCP is seeking comments on a 

series of specific questions about the 

possible design of its new data 

collection tool, as well as comments on 

other aspects of the tool that would 

assist the agency in carrying out its 

mission. OFCCP could use the data 

collected by the tool to conduct analysis 

at the establishment level, as well as 

identify and analyze industry trends, 

Federal contractors’ compensation 

practices and potential equal 

employment-related issues. The data 

collected could be instrumental to 

developing indicators for identifying 

potential noncompliance by contractors 

and executing OFCCP’s authority 

related to compensation discrimination. 

OFCCP seeks to maximize the 

potential value of this data collection 

tool while taking into account the 

reporting burden created for contractors 

and the technology and/or analytic 

burdens placed on the agency. Public 

comment on these larger questions 

would be helpful with regard to any of 

the more specific requests for comments 

on the categories of data or analyses 

described below. 

1. What data or information should be 

collected in order for OFCCP to assess 

whether further investigation into the 

contractor’s compensation decisions 

and policies is necessary? In developing 

your response, please consider whether 

any of the following categories of data, 

reported by gender and race/ethnic 

groups, singly or in combination, would 

effectively identify potential 

compensation discrimination: 

(a) Average starting or initial total 

compensation (including paid leave, 

health and retirement benefits, etc.); 

(b) Average pay raises; 

(c) Average bonuses; 

(d) Minimum and maximum salary; 

(e) Standard deviation or variance of 

salary; 

(f) The number of workers in each 

gender and race/ethnicity category; 

(g) Average tenure; 

(h) Average compensation data by job 

series (e.g., all engineers within a 

particular department or all secretaries 

throughout the establishment); and/or 

(i) Any other categories of data? 

2. By what set of job categories should 

the data referred to in question (1) be 

collected? Some job group options 

include EEO–1 job categories,13 OFCCP’s 

Affirmative Action Program job 

groups,14 2 or 3-digit Standard 

Occupational Classification 

Codes,15 O*Net Occupational 

Classification Codes,16 salary bands, 

salary bands within EEO–1 categories, 

individual job titles or individual job 

titles within EEO–1 job categories. Are 

there other options? What are the 

benefits and drawbacks of the various 

options? 

3. What elements of compensation 

should be collected? In developing your 

response consider the following 

elements: 

(a) Total W–2 earnings; 

(b) Base salary; 

(c) Holiday pay; 

(d) Hourly wage; 

(e) Shift differential; 

(f) Commissions; 

(g) Stock options; and/or 

(h) Any other elements of 

compensation (e.g., paid leave, health or 

retirement benefits)? 

4. Is there a set of questions that 

would capture information that would 

be helpful in understanding a 

contractor’s compensation system, such 

as policies relating to promotion 

decisions, bonuses, shift pay, setting of 

initial pay, etc.? 

5. OFCCP may use the data collected 

through the tool to conduct industrywide compensation trend analyses. 

(a) What type of compensation trend 

analyses would be appropriate to 

conduct on an industry-wide basis? 

(b) For each type of analysis identified 

in subpart (a) above, identify the: (i) 

Categories of data that should be 

collected in order to compare 

compensation data across contractors in 

a particular industry and (ii) job 

groupings that should be used. 

6. The data collected through the tool 

may be used to identify contractors in 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 49401 

17A blank copy of the 2000 EO Survey will be 

posted in www.regulations.gov as a supporting 

document to this ANPRM. To view the EO Survey 

in http://www.regulations.gov search by RIN 

number 1250–AA03. 

specific industries for industry-focused 

compensation reviews. What specific 

categories of data would be most useful 

for identifying contractors in specific 

industries for industry focused 

compensation reviews? 

7. OFCCP is exploring the possibility 

of using the data collected through the 

tool to identify opportunities for 

nationwide multi-establishment 

compensation reviews. 

(a) What specific categories of data 

would be most useful for conducting 

compensation analyses across a 

contractor’s various establishments? 

(b) What are the benefits and 

drawbacks of collecting contractor’s 

compensation data on a nationwide 

basis rather than on an individual 

establishment basis? 

(c) What are the benefits and 

drawbacks of collecting contractor’s 

compensation data on a nationwide 

basis in addition to an individual 

establishment basis? 

8. The data collection tool may 

require contractors to submit data on an 

establishment basis. Given the possible 

designs of the tool and its proposed 

uses, OFCCP is interested in learning of 

any practical concerns contractors may 

have regarding responding to the 

compensation data request and how 

contractors currently record and 

maintain compensation data. 

Specifically: 

(a) What general tasks would be 

required by a contractor in order to 

provide the compensation data? 

(b) What categories of compensationrelated data are currently maintained in 

computer-based personnel or payroll 

systems? 

(c) What specific costs and/or benefits 

would be associated with collecting this 

type of data? 

9. OFCCP is considering designing the 

tool so that it may be used by 

contractors to conduct self-assessments 

of their compensation decisions. What 

specific categories of data would be 

most useful to contractors interested in 

using the tool in this manner? 

10. What were the strengths and 

weaknesses of the compensation section 

of the 2000 EO Survey? 17

11. OFCCP is considering requiring 

contractors to submit data 

electronically. What factors should 

OFCCP take into consideration when 

designing this data collection tool? 

Interested parties should suggest 

preferred formats—i.e., a web-based 

form (like the EEO–1), excel 

spreadsheet, etc. What types of 

databases are currently used, if any, to 

maintain personnel and payroll data? 

12. An option that OFCCP is 

considering is the possibility of 

requiring businesses that are bidding on 

future Federal contracts to submit 

compensation data as part of the 

Request for Proposal process. In such a 

case, the data collected may be used for 

trend analyses as well as targeting 

contractors for post-award compliance 

reviews. What are the benefits and 

drawbacks of administering the data 

collection tool in this manner? 

13. Should OFCCP decide to expand 

the scope of the compensation data 

collection tool beyond supply and 

service contractors to include 

construction contractors, what factors or 

issues particularly relevant to such 

contractors should OFCCP keep in mind 

when designing and implementing the 

tool? 

14. Are there other constructive 

suggestions for the design, content, 

analysis, and implementation of a 

compensation data collection tool? 

15. Consistent with the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, OFCCP must consider 

the impact of any proposed rule on 

small entities, including small 

businesses, small nonprofit 

organizations and small governmental 

jurisdictions with populations under 

50,000. In response to this ANPRM, 

OFCCP encourages small entities to 

provide data on how they may be 

impacted by the requirement to provide 

the compensation data requested by the 

new data collection tool. 

(a) The Department seeks public 

comment on the types of small entities 

and any estimates of the numbers of 

small entities that may be impacted by 

this rule. 

(b) The Department seeks public 

comment on the potential identifiable 

costs of the data collection on small 

entities. 

(c) The Department seeks public 

comment on any possible alternatives to 

the proposed measures that would allow 

OFCCP to achieve its objectives while 

minimizing any likely adverse impact to 

small businesses such as allowing 

smaller establishments to submit 

administrative data—for example, 

quarterly unemployment insurance tax 

payments that would include wage 

information—augmented by gender and 

race/ethnicity identification, but 

without other compensation details. 

OFCCP encourages interested parties 

to comment on these questions and the 

related questions of how OFCCP can 

maximize the potential value of this 

data collection tool while taking into 

account the reporting burden created for 

contractors and the technology and/or 

analytic burdens placed on the agency. 

Dated: August 5, 2011 

Patricia A. Shiu, 

Director, Office of Federal Contract 

Compliance Programs. 

[FR Doc. 2011–20299 Filed 8–9–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–45–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 36, 54, 61, 64, and 69 

[WC Docket No. 10–90; DA 11–1348] 

Universal Service—Intercarrier 

Compensation Transformation 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission 

(Commission) seeks targeted comment 

on certain issues in the Universal 

Service—Intercarrier Compensation 

Transformation proceeding. The 

Commission has received several 

proposals in the record in this 

proceeding to which we would like to 

receive comment from interested 

parties. This opportunity for additional, 

targeted comment will facilitate 

comprehensive universal service and 

intercarrier compensation reform. 

DATES: Comments on the Pubic Notice 

are due on or before August 24, 2011, 

and reply comments are due on or 

before August 31, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by WC Docket Nos. 10–90, 

07–135, 05–337, 03–109; GN Docket No. 

09–51; CC Docket Nos. 01–92, 96–45, by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Federal Communications 

Commission’s Web Site: http:// 

fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• People with Disabilities: Contact the 

FCC to request reasonable 

accommodations (accessible format 

documents, sign language interpreters, 

CART, etc.) by e-mail: FCC504@fcc.gov 

or phone: (202) 418–0530 or TTY: (202) 

418–0432. 

For detailed instructions for 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the notice process, see 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

of this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Katie King, Telecommunications Access 

Policy Division, Wireline Competition 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS