Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 67 / Thursday, April 7, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 20321 

1The regulations implementing WIOA Section 

188 (29 CFR part 38) use the phrases ‘‘on the basis 

of . . . sex’’ and ‘‘based on sex.’’ The relevant 

statutory language (at 29 U.S.C. 3248(a)(2)) uses the 

phrase ‘‘because of . . . sex.’’ These phrases are 

used interchangeably in this notification. 

private sector, of $100,000,000 or more 

(adjusted annually for inflation) in any 

1 year * * *.’’ Therefore, neither a 

Small Government Agency Plan nor any 

other action is required under UMRA of 

1995. 

Congressional Review Act 

This rule is not a major rule as 

defined by the Congressional Review 

Act (CRA), 5 U.S.C. 804. However, 

pursuant to the CRA, DEA is submitting 

a copy of this final rule to the 

Government Accountability Office, the 

House, and the Senate under the CRA. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

This action does not impose a new 

collection of information under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 44 

U.S.C. 3501–3521. This action would 

not impose recordkeeping or reporting 

requirements on state or local 

governments, individuals, businesses, or 

organizations. An agency may not 

conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 

required to respond to, a collection of 

information unless it displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

Determination To Make Rule Effective 

Immediately 

As indicated above, this rule finalizes 

the schedule I control status of 5FEDMB-PINACA, 5F-MDMB-PICA, FUBAKB48, 5F-CUMYL-PINACA, and FUB144 that has already been in effect for 

over two years by virtue of the April 16, 

2019, temporary scheduling order (84 

FR 15505) and the subsequent one-year 

extension of that order (March 31, 2021, 

86 FR 16669). The April 2019 order was 

effective on the date of publication, and 

was based on findings by the thenActing Administrator that the temporary 

scheduling of these substances was 

necessary to avoid an imminent hazard 

to the public safety pursuant to 21 

U.S.C. 811(h)(1). 

Because this rule finalizes the control 

status of 5F-EDMB-PINACA, 5F-MDMBPICA, FUB-AKB48, 5F-CUMYLPINACA, and FUB-144 that has already 

been in effect for over two years, it does 

not alter the legal obligations of any 

person who handles these substances. 

Rather, it merely makes permanent the 

current scheduling status and 

corresponding legal obligations. 

Therefore, DEA is making the rule 

effective on the date of publication in 

the Federal Register, as any delay in the 

effective date is unnecessary and would 

be contrary to the public interest. See 5 

U.S.C. 553(d). 

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 1308 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Drug traffic control, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set out above, 21 CFR 

part 1308 is amended as follows: 

PART 1308—SCHEDULES OF 

CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES 

■ 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR 

part 1308 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 811, 812, 871(b), 

956(b), unless otherwise noted. 

■ 2. In § 1308.11: 

■ a. Add paragraphs (d)(89) through 

(d)(93); and 

■ b. Remove and reserve paragraphs 

(h)(37) through (41); 

The additions read as follows: 

§ 1308.11 Schedule I. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(89) ethyl 2-(1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3,3- 

dimethylbutanoate (other name: 5FEDMB-PINACA) ........................................ 7036 

(90) methyl 2-(1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1Hindole-3-carboxamido)-3,3- 

dimethylbutanoate (other names: 5FMDMB-PICA; 5F-MDMB-2201) ................ 7041 

(91) N-(adamantan-1-yl)-1-(4-fluorobenzyl)- 

1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (other 

names: FUB-AKB48; FUB-APINACA; 

AKB48 N-(4-FLUOROBENZYL)) ............. 7047 

(92) 1-(5-fluoropentyl)-N-(2-phenylpropan2-yl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (other 

names: 5F-CUMYL-PINACA; SGT-25) .... 7083 

(93) (1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-1H-indol-3- 

yl)(2,2,3,3- 

tetramethylcyclopropyl)methanone 

(other name: FUB-144) ............................. 7014 

* * * * * 

Anne Milgram, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2022–07320 Filed 4–6–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–09–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Office of the Secretary 

29 CFR Part 38 

Notification of Interpretation of Section 

188 of the Workforce Innovation and 

Opportunity Act 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Labor. 

ACTION: Notification of interpretation. 

SUMMARY: This Notification is to inform 

the public that, consistent with the 

Supreme Court’s 2020 decision in 

Bostock v. Clayton County and Title IX 

of the Education Amendments of 1972, 

the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), 

beginning April 7, 2022, will interpret 

the prohibition on discrimination on the 

basis of sex that is codified in Section 

188 of the Workforce Innovation and 

Opportunity Act to include 

discrimination on the basis of sexual 

orientation. DOL will continue to 

interpret and enforce Section 188’s 

prohibition on discrimination on the 

basis of sex to include discrimination on 

the basis of gender identity and 

transgender status. This interpretation 

will guide DOL’s Civil Rights Center in 

processing complaints and conducting 

investigations and compliance reviews, 

but does not determine the outcome in 

any particular case or set of facts. 

DATES: This notification is effective 

April 7, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Naomi Barry-Perez, Director, Civil 

Rights Center, U.S. Department of Labor, 

200 Constitution Ave. NW, Room 

N–4123, Washington, DC 20210. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOL is 

informing the public that, consistent 

with the Supreme Court’s decision in 

Bostock v. Clayton County, 140 S. Ct. 

1731 (2020), and Title IX of the 

Education Amendments of 1972, 20 

U.S.C. 1681 et seq., DOL, beginning 

April 7, 2022, will interpret the 

prohibition on discrimination on the 

basis of sex in Section 188 of the 

Workforce Innovation and Opportunity 

Act (WIOA), 29 U.S.C. 3248, to include 

discrimination on the basis of sexual 

orientation.1 DOL will continue to 

interpret and enforce Section 188’s 

prohibition on discrimination on the 

basis of sex to include discrimination on 

the basis of gender identity and 

transgender status, as set forth in the 

regulations issued under Section 188.29 

CFR 38.7. 

The Civil Rights Center (CRC) at DOL 

is responsible for enforcing Section 188 

of WIOA and regulations issued under 

Section 188, which prohibit exclusion 

of an individual from participation in, 

denial of the benefits of, discrimination 

in, or denial of employment in the 

administration of or in connection with, 

any programs and activities funded or 

otherwise financially assisted in whole 

or in part under Title I of WIOA on 

various bases, including sex. 29 U.S.C. 

3248(a). 

On June 15, 2020, the U.S. Supreme 

Court held that the prohibition on 

employment discrimination based on 

sex in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act 

of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq., 

encompasses discrimination based on 

sexual orientation, gender identity, and 

transgender status. The Court concluded 

that the plain meaning of ‘‘because of 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
20322 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 67 / Thursday, April 7, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

2Memorandum from Principal Deputy Assistant 

Attorney General Pamela S. Karlan, Civil Rights 

Division, U.S. Department of Justice, to Federal 

Agency Civil Rights Directors and General 

Counsels, Application of Bostock v. Clayton County 

to Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 

(Mar. 26, 2021), available at https://

www.justice.gov/crt/page/file/1383026/download. 

3Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of 

Justice, Title IX Legal Manual, Title IX Cover 

Addendum post-Bostock, available at https://

www.justice.gov/file/1423496/download. 

4U.S. Department of Education, Enforcement of 

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 with 

Respect to Discrimination Based on Sexual 

Orientation and Gender Identity in Light of Bostock 

v. Clayton County, Notice of Interpretation, 86 FR 

32637 (June 22, 2021). 

5See, e.g., Grimm, 972 F.3d at 617–18 (describing 

injuries to a transgender boy’s physical and 

emotional health as a result of denial of equal 

treatment); Dodds v. U.S. Dep’t of Educ., 845 F.3d 

217, 221–22 (6th Cir. 2016) (describing ‘‘substantial 

and immediate adverse effects on the daily life and 

well-being of an eleven-year-old’’ transgender girl 

from denial of equal treatment); Doe v. Univ. of 

Scranton, No. 3:19–CV–01486, 2020 WL 5993766, 

at *1–3 (M.D. Pa. Oct. 9, 2020) (describing 

harassment and physical targeting of a gay college 

student that interfered with the student’s 

educational opportunity); Harrington v. City of 

Attleboro, No. 15–CV–12769–DJC, 2018 WL 475000, 

at *6–7 (D. Mass. Jan. 17, 2018) (describing ‘‘‘widespread peer harassment’ and physical assault [of a 

lesbian high school student] because of stereotyping 

animus focused on [the student’s] sex, appearance, 

and perceived or actual sexual orientation’’). 

sex’’ in Title VII necessarily includes 

discrimination because of sexual 

orientation, gender identity, and 

transgender status. Bostock v. Clayton 

County, 140 S. Ct. 1731, 1753–54 (2020). 

Since Bostock, at least one Federal 

circuit court of appeal has concluded 

that the plain language of Title IX’s 

prohibition on sex discrimination must 

be read similarly, and the Supreme 

Court has denied review of that 

decision. Grimm v. Gloucester Cnty. 

Sch. Bd., 972 F.3d 586, 616 (4th Cir. 

2020), as amended (Aug. 28, 2020), 

petition for cert. denied, No. 20–1163 

(June 28, 2021). 

On March 26, 2021, the Civil Rights 

Division of the U.S. Department of 

Justice, the agency charged with 

coordination of the implementation and 

enforcement of Title IX by executive 

agencies, issued a memorandum 

concluding that ‘‘the best reading of 

Title IX’s prohibition on discrimination 

‘on the basis of sex’ is that it includes 

discrimination on the basis of gender 

identity and sexual orientation.’’ 2 The 

Civil Rights Division reached this 

conclusion after considering the text of 

Title IX, Bostock and other Supreme 

Court case law, including dissenting 

opinions, and developing jurisprudence 

in this area, including the circuit court 

opinion cited above. The Civil Rights 

Division subsequently updated its Title 

IX Legal Manual to state that the 

Department of Justice interprets Title IX 

to prohibit discrimination based on 

gender identity and sexual orientation.3

In addition, on June 22, 2021, the 

Office for Civil Rights of the U.S. 

Department of Education, the agency 

responsible for that Department’s 

enforcement of Title IX, published a 

notice in the Federal Register clarifying 

that it will enforce Title IX’s prohibition 

on discrimination based on sex to 

include discrimination based on both 

sexual orientation and gender identity.4

The Office for Civil Rights concluded 

that the Supreme Court’s interpretation 

of sex discrimination in Bostock 

properly applies to Title IX based on the 

textual similarity between Title VII and 

Title IX; subsequent case law including 

the Grimm decision cited above, as well 

as cases recognizing the harm that 

students may endure as a result of 

differential treatment based on gender 

identity or sexual orientation; 5 and the 

Civil Rights Division’s memorandum 

discussed above. 

Section 188 of WIOA expressly 

incorporates Title IX’s prohibition on 

sex discrimination. 29 U.S.C. 3248(a)(2) 

(specifying that ‘‘[n]o individual shall 

be excluded from participation in, 

denied the benefits of, subjected to 

discrimination under, or denied 

employment in the administration of or 

in connection with, any such program 

or activity [funded or otherwise 

financially assisted in whole or in part 

under Title I of WIOA] because of . . . 

sex (except as otherwise permitted 

under title IX of the Education 

Amendments of 1972 . . .)’’); see also 

id. 3248(a)(1) (providing that ‘‘programs 

and activities funded or otherwise 

financially assisted in whole or in part 

under [WIOA] are considered to be 

programs and activities receiving 

Federal financial assistance’’ for the 

purpose of applying the prohibition 

against discrimination on the basis of 

sex under Title IX). 

Consistent with the Supreme Court’s 

interpretation of Title VII in Bostock and 

with the case law and interpretations 

discussed above applying the same 

conclusion to Title IX, beginning April 

7, 2022, CRC interprets Section 188’s 

prohibition on discrimination on the 

basis of sex to include discrimination on 

the basis of sexual orientation, as well 

as gender identity and transgender 

status. This interpretation will guide 

CRC in processing complaints and 

conducting investigations and 

compliance reviews, but it does not 

determine the outcome in any particular 

case, which will depend on the specific 

facts and circumstances. Any action 

taken by CRC in a specific case will take 

account of all relevant facts and legal 

requirements, including, where 

applicable, Title IX’s religious 

exemption and other exemptions, which 

are incorporated into Section 188, see 

29 U.S.C. 3248(a)(2), and the Religious 

Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U.S.C. 

2000bb et seq. 

If you think that you have, or any 

specific class of individuals has, been 

subjected to discrimination under a 

WIOA Title I-financially assisted 

program or activity, you may file a 

complaint within 180 days from the 

date of the alleged violation with either: 

(1) The recipient’s Equal Opportunity

Officer (or the person whom the

recipient has designated for this

purpose) or (2) CRC, via postal mail

addressed to The Director, Civil Rights

Center (CRC), U.S. Department of Labor,

200 Constitution Avenue NW, Room

N–4123, Washington, DC 20210, or

electronically as directed on the CRC

website at https://www.dol.gov/

agencies/oasam/centers-offices/civilrights-center/external/how-to-filecomplaint. The complaint will be

processed in accordance with the

procedures at 29 CFR 38.69–.85. After

investigating the complaint, if the

Director of CRC finds reasonable cause

to believe that the recipient has violated

WIOA Section 188 or its implementing

regulations, the Director is required to

issue an Initial Determination that

includes the opportunity for the

recipient to engage in voluntary

compliance negotiations. 29 CFR

38.87(e).

Martin J. Walsh, 

Secretary, Department of Labor. 

[FR Doc. 2022–07290 Filed 4–6–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket Number USCG–2022–0212] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone; Anacostia River, 

Washington, DC 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary safety zone for 

certain waters of the Anacostia River. 

The safety zone is needed to protect 

personnel, vessels, and the marine 

environment on these navigable waters 

near Washington, DC on April 16, 2022 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES