27824 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 94 / Thursday, May 15, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

31 In particular, the written request for 

confidential treatment that accompanies the 

comment must include the factual and legal basis 

for the request, and must identify the specific 

portions of the comment to be withheld from the 

public record. See FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c). 

1 29 U.S.C. 791. 

2Section 501 applies to ‘‘each department, 

agency, and instrumentality (including the United 

States Postal Service and the Postal Regulatory 

Commission) in the executive branch and the 

Smithsonian Institution.’’ 29 U.S.C. 791(b). For 

convenience, this Notice uses the term ‘‘federal 

agency’’ or ‘‘agency’’ to mean any federal entity 

covered by Section 501. 

3 29 U.S.C. 791(g). 

4 29 U.S.C. 791(b). 

5 29 CFR 1614.203(b). 

6 29 CFR 1614.203(a). 

explained in FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 

4.9(c).31 Your comment will be kept 

confidential only if the FTC General 

Counsel grants your request in 

accordance with the law and the public 

interest. 

Postal mail addressed to the 

Commission is subject to delay due to 

heightened security screening. As a 

result, we encourage you to submit your 

comments online. To make sure that the 

Commission considers your online 

comment, you must file it at https://

ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/

fueleconomyguide, by following the 

instruction on the web-based form. If 

this Notice appears at http://

www.regulations.gov, you also may file 

a comment through that Web site. 

If you file your comment on paper, 

write ‘‘Fuel Economy Guide, R711008’’ 

on your comment and on the envelope, 

and mail it to the following address: 

Federal Trade Commission, Office of the 

Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Suite CC–5610, (Annex O), 

Washington, DC 20580, or deliver your 

comment to the following address: 

Federal Trade Commission, Office of the 

Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th 

Street SW., 5th Floor, Suite 5610, 

(Annex O), Washington, DC 20024. If 

possible, submit your paper comment to 

the Commission by courier or overnight 

service. 

Visit the Commission Web site at 

http://www.ftc.gov to read this NPRM 

and the News Release describing this 

proceeding. The FTC Act and other laws 

that the Commission administers permit 

the collection of public comments to 

consider and use in this proceeding, as 

appropriate. The Commission will 

consider all timely and responsive 

public comments that it receives on or 

before July 10, 2014. You can find more 

information, including routine uses 

permitted by the Privacy Act, in the 

Commission’s privacy policy, at http:// 

www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm. 

By direction of the Commission. 

Donald S. Clark, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2014–10889 Filed 5–14–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P 

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 

COMMISSION 

29 CFR Part 1614 

RIN 3046–AA94 

The Federal Sector’s Obligation To Be 

a Model Employer of Individuals With 

Disabilities 

AGENCY: Equal Employment 

Opportunity Commission. 

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Equal Employment 

Opportunity Commission (‘‘EEOC’’ or 

‘‘Commission’’) is issuing an Advance 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to invite 

the public to comment on how it can 

amend its regulations to clarify the 

federal government’s obligation to be a 

model employer of individuals with 

disabilities. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

July 14, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by RIN 3046–AA94, by any of 

the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 663–4114. (There is no 

toll free FAX number). Only comments 

of six or fewer pages will be accepted 

via FAX transmittal, in order to assure 

access to the equipment. Receipt of FAX 

transmittals will not be acknowledged, 

except that the sender may request 

confirmation of receipt by calling the 

Executive Secretariat staff at (202) 663– 

4070 (voice) or (202) 663–4074 (TTY). 

(These are not toll free numbers). 

• Mail: Bernadette Wilson, Acting 

Executive Officer, Executive Secretariat, 

Equal Employment Opportunity 

Commission, U.S. Equal Employment 

Opportunity Commission, 131 M Street 

NE., Washington, DC 20507. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Bernadette 

Wilson, Acting Executive Officer, 

Executive Secretariat, Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission, 

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity 

Commission, 131 M Street NE., 

Washington, DC 20507. 

Instructions: The Commission invites 

comments from all interested parties. 

All comment submissions must include 

the agency name and docket number or 

the Regulatory Information Number 

(‘‘RIN’’) for this rulemaking. Comments 

need be submitted in only one of the 

above-listed formats. All comments 

received will be posted without change 

to http://www.regulations.gov, including 

any personal information you provide. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http://

www.regulations.gov. Copies of the 

received comments also will be 

available for review at the Commission’s 

library, 131 M Street NE., Suite 

4NW08R, Washington, DC 20507, 

between the hours of 9:30 a.m. and 5:00 

p.m., from July 14, 2014 until the 

Commission publishes the rule in final 

form. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christopher Kuczynski, Assistant Legal 

Counsel, or Aaron Konopasky, Senior 

Attorney-Advisor, at (202) 663–4637 

(voice) or (202) 663–7026 (TTY). (These 

are not toll free numbers.) Requests for 

this notice in an alternative format 

should be made to the Office of 

Communications and Legislative Affairs 

at (202) 663–4191 (voice) or (202) 663– 

4494 (TTY). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as 

amended (‘‘section 501’’),1 requires both 

nondiscrimination and affirmative 

action with respect to federal employees 

and applicants for federal employment 

who are individuals with disabilities. It 

provides specifically that the standards 

used to determine whether a federal 

agency 2 has discriminated against an 

individual with a disability ‘‘shall be 

the standards applied under title I of the 

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 

. . . and the provisions of sections 501 

through 504, and 510, of the Americans 

with Disabilities Act of 1990 . . . as 

such sections relate to employment.’’ 3 It 

also requires federal agencies to 

maintain, update annually, and submit 

to the Commission an ‘‘affirmative 

action program plan for the hiring, 

placement, and advancement of 

individuals with disabilities.’’ 4

Commission regulations 

implementing section 501 reiterate that 

federal agencies are prohibited from 

discriminating against individuals with 

disabilities under Americans with 

Disabilities Act (‘‘ADA’’) standards, and 

further clarify that 29 CFR part 1630 is 

intended to set forth those standards.5

Additionally, the section 501 

regulations provide that the federal 

government ‘‘shall be a model employer 

of individuals with disabilities.’’ 6


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 94 / Thursday, May 15, 2014 / Proposed Rules 27825 

7 Id. 

8 29 CFR pt. 1630. 

9See 29 CFR pt. 1614. 

10 Management Directive 715, U.S. Equal Emp’t 

Opportunity Comm’n (Oct. 1, 2003), http://

www.eeoc.gov/federal/directives/md715.cfm. 

11See, e.g., Instructions to Federal Agencies for 

Equal Employment Opportunity Management 

Directive 715 (EEO MD–715), U.S. Equal Emp’t 

Opportunity Comm’n, http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/ 

directives/md715instruct.cfm (last modified Dec. 

12, 2008); Frequently Asked Questions About 

Management Directive MD–715, U.S. Equal Emp’t 

Opportunity Comm’n, http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/ 

directives/qanda_md715.cfm (last visited Dec. 16, 

2013). 

12See E.O. 11478, 34 FR 12985 (1969); Reorg. 

Plan No. 1 of 1978, 43 FR 19807 (1978); E.O. 12144, 

44 FR 37193 (1979); E.O. 12106, 44 FR 1053 (1979). 

13 29 U.S.C. 794a(a)(1) (incorporating the 

remedies, procedures, and rights set forth in 42 

U.S.C. 2000e–16, including the EEOC’s right to 

‘‘issue such rules, regulations, orders and 

instructions as it deems necessary and appropriate 

to carry out its responsibilit[y]’’ to enforce the law, 

codified at 42 U.S.C. 2000e–6(b)). 

14SF 256 is a form used by federal agencies to 

invite employees to identify themselves as 

individuals with disabilities. See Standard Form 

256, U.S. Office of Pers. Mgmt. (July, 2010), http:// 

www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/sf256.pdf. 

15The survey, which measures federal 

employees’ perceptions of their employers, invites 

respondents to indicate whether they have 

disabilities. See Data, Analysis & Documentation, 

U.S. Office of Pers. Mgmt. (July, 2010), http://www.

opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/data-analysisdocumentation/employee-surveys/#url=

Governmentwide-Results (explaining the history 

and purpose of the survey, and providing a link to 

reports summarizing survey results). 

16See Demographic Information on Applicants, 

OMB No. 3046–0046, U.S. Equal Emp’t Opportunity 

Comm’n (approved Feb. 10, 2014), http://

www.eeoc.gov/federal/upload/Applicant_Tracking_

Form_2-19-2014-2.pdf. 

17See 5 CFR 213.3102(u); see also Schedule A 

Hiring Authority, U.S. Office of Pers. Mgmt., https:// 

Continued 

However, other than requiring federal 

agencies to ‘‘give full consideration to 

the hiring, placement, and advancement 

of qualified individuals with 

disabilities,’’ 7 the section 501 

regulations do not explain what this 

obligation means or how it relates to 

agencies’ nondiscrimination or 

affirmative action obligations. 

The Commission proposes to revise 

its regulations in 29 CFR part 1614 to 

include a more detailed explanation of 

the model employer obligation. Before it 

publishes a proposed regulation, the 

Commission seeks comments from 

members of the public on how further 

regulation by the Commission may 

assist the federal government in meeting 

this obligation. 

Need for the Rule 

Although Commission regulations 

already contain a detailed explanation 

of the standards for determining 

whether an agency has violated section 

501’s nondiscrimination provisions,8

and of the process by which those 

provisions may be enforced,9 they do 

not explain what the model employer 

obligation entails. Instead, the 

Commission has, separate from the 

section 501 implementing regulations, 

required agencies to undertake actions 

related to employment of individuals 

with disabilities in addition to those 

required as a matter of 

nondiscrimination. For example, 29 

CFR 1614.102 imposes certain 

minimum standards for federal equal 

employment opportunity programs, and 

Management Directive 715 (‘‘MD– 

715’’) 10 and its accompanying 

materials11 provide some guidance on 

how to uncover and eliminate barriers 

to employment faced by individuals 

with disabilities. However, 29 CFR 

1614.102 does not address the specific 

obligation of federal agencies to be 

model employers of individuals with 

disabilities. The Commission is 

concerned that, without additional 

explanation about what it means to be 

a model employer of individuals with 

disabilities, federal agencies may not 

fulfill their obligations under section 

501 of the Rehabilitation Act. 

Authority 

All responsibility for the 

administration and enforcement of 

equal opportunity in federal 

employment is vested in the 

Commission.12 The Commission is 

authorized under 29 U.S.C. 794a(a)(1) to 

issue rules, regulations, orders, and 

instructions pursuant to section 501.13

Request for Comments 

EEOC is seeking public comment on 

the following: 

1. What barriers do individuals with 

disabilities face in the federal 

recruitment and hiring process? For 

example, are there specific job 

qualifications that frequently exclude 

individuals with disabilities from 

federal jobs they can perform? What 

kinds of regulatory requirements, other 

than the existing requirement not to 

discriminate based on disability, might 

effectively address these barriers? 

2. Would requiring federal agencies to 

adopt employment goals for individuals 

with disabilities help them to become 

model employers of individuals with 

disabilities? What are the advantages 

and disadvantages of requiring federal 

agencies to adopt employment goals? 

How and what information should be 

used to analyze the benefits and costs of 

such a requirement? 

3. If goals are adopted— 

a. How should the goals be set? For 

example: 

i. Should an agency’s goal be to have 

a workforce that reflects the availability 

of individuals with disabilities in the 

national labor pool, to increase the 

number of individuals with disabilities 

it employs by a certain amount each 

year, or to have its new hires reflect the 

availability of qualified individuals with 

disabilities in the applicant pool? How 

should the goal(s) account for people 

with disabilities who are not 

participating in the labor force, or the 

extent to which people with disabilities 

in the labor pool are qualified for agency 

positions? 

ii. Should the regulations give federal 

agencies the option of either meeting a 

uniform goal(s) set by EEOC or meeting 

a goal(s) which they set after 

considering factors enumerated in the 

regulations? What are the advantages 

and disadvantages of this approach, and 

what factors are most relevant for 

establishing goals? 

iii. Would information about the 

number of federal employees who have 

self-identified as individuals with 

disabilities on the Standard Form 256 

(SF 256) 14 and in the most recent 

Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey 15

be helpful in establishing goals for the 

employment of people with disabilities? 

The Commission has recently added 

questions about disability to the form 

used by federal agencies to collect 

demographic information on job 

applicants.16 Could data collected using 

that form, as revised, be used to set 

goals? What are the advantages and 

disadvantages of relying on these data? 

What other data are available? 

iv. Should the goal(s) be applied to 

specified job categories, GS, or SES 

levels, or applied across federal 

agencies’ workforces? 

b. Which types of disabilities should 

count toward fulfillment of the goal(s), 

and why? For example, should there be 

separate goals for individuals with 

disabilities as defined by the 

Rehabilitation Act and individuals with 

the most significant disabilities (known 

in federal employment as ‘‘targeted 

disabilities’’)? 

c. What should an agency do to 

determine whether the goals have been 

met? For example, should it rely solely 

on voluntary self-disclosure through SF 

256 and the form used by federal 

agencies to collect demographic 

information on job applicants? Or 

should it also, for example, consider 

individuals who have requested 

reasonable accommodation or entered 

the workforce through the Schedule A 

excepted hiring authority for ‘‘persons 

with intellectual disabilities, severe 

physical disabilities, or psychiatric 

disabilities’’? 17


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
27826 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 94 / Thursday, May 15, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/disabilityemployment/hiring/#url=Schedule-A-HiringAuthority. 

d. Should there be consequences for 

federal agencies that fail to meet the 

goals? If so, what should they be? 

4. Are there specific hiring policies 

and practices other than, or in addition 

to, establishing goals that should be part 

of the regulation for being a model 

employer of individuals with 

disabilities? For example, should the 

proposed model employer regulation 

require agencies to work with entities 

specializing in the placement of 

individuals with disabilities, such as 

state vocational rehabilitation agencies 

or the Department of Labor’s Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs; to 

interview all qualified job applicants 

with disabilities; to assign additional 

‘‘points’’ to qualified applicants with 

disabilities; to subject their qualification 

standards (including safety 

requirements) to internal or external 

review to identify unnecessary barriers 

to people with disabilities; to include 

certain information about affirmative 

action for individuals with disabilities 

in their job advertisements; to observe 

certain guidelines for determining the 

essential functions of the job; or to 

engage in additional, targeted outreach? 

Commenters suggesting that specific 

policies or practices be included in the 

proposed regulation are encouraged to 

include information about the benefits 

and costs of the suggested policy or 

practice. 

5. Are there any policies or practices 

related to retention, inclusion, and 

advancement of federal employees with 

disabilities, other than policies and 

practices that are already required by 

EEOC regulations, that a federal agency 

should be required to adopt to become 

a model employer of individuals with 

disabilities? For example, should the 

proposed model employer regulation 

require agencies to have reasonable 

accommodation procedures meeting 

certain standards, or to take certain 

remedial actions if they fail to achieve 

roughly equal average levels of 

compensation for employees with and 

without disabilities? Are there 

particular policies related to travel, 

technology, or security measures that 

could eliminate systemic barriers to 

federal employment of people with 

disabilities? Should agencies be 

required to gather feedback regarding 

their efforts to retain, include, and 

advance employees with disabilities on 

an ongoing basis, for example by 

convening roundtables with managers 

or conducting exit interviews with 

individuals with disabilities when they 

leave the agency? Please be as specific 

as possible about what the proposed 

new regulation should require. You are 

encouraged to provide information 

about the benefits and costs of the 

suggested policy or practice. 

6. Are there any policies or practices 

related to reasonable accommodation, 

other than policies and practices that 

are already required by EEOC 

regulations, that federal agencies should 

be required to adopt to become model 

employers of individuals with 

disabilities? For example, should the 

proposed model employer regulation 

require agencies to establish certain 

time limits for the provision of 

accommodations; observe certain 

limitations on the collection of medical 

information during the interactive 

process; or adopt certain methods of 

funding, or budgeting for, reasonable 

accommodations, such as a centralized 

funding mechanism that would avoid 

charging individual program budgets for 

the cost of accommodations, or a 

centralized contracting vehicle or 

contract authority to streamline the 

accommodation process? Again, please 

be as specific as possible about what 

sorts of policies or practices the 

proposed new regulation should 

require. You are encouraged to provide 

information about the benefits and costs 

of the suggested policy or practice. 

7. What requirements, other than 

those discussed above and the existing 

requirement not to discriminate based 

on disability, should be included in the 

proposed regulation to better clarify 

what it means to be a model employer 

of individuals with disabilities? 

The Commission encourages any 

interested party to comment on one or 

more of these questions, and to provide 

any other relevant information, 

including information about the benefits 

and costs of suggested policies, 

practices, or general approaches. 

Dated: May 12, 2014. 

For the Commission. 

Jacqueline A. Berrien, 

Chair. 

[FR Doc. 2014–11233 Filed 5–14–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6570–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

38 CFR Part 63 

RIN 2900–AO71 

Health Care for Homeless Veterans 

Program 

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its 

medical regulations concerning 

eligibility for the Health Care for 

Homeless Veterans (HCHV) program. 

The HCHV program provides per diem 

payments to non-VA community-based 

facilities that provide housing, outreach 

services, case management services, and 

rehabilitative services, and may provide 

care and/or treatment to homeless 

veterans who are enrolled in or eligible 

for VA health care. The proposed rule 

would modify VA’s HCHV regulations 

to conform to changes enacted in the 

Honoring America’s Veterans and 

Caring for Camp Lejeune Families Act of 

2012. Specifically, the proposed rule 

would remove the requirement that 

homeless veterans be diagnosed with a 

serious mental illness or substance use 

disorder to qualify for the HCHV 

program. This change would make the 

program available to all homeless 

veterans who are enrolled in or eligible 

for VA health care. The proposed rule 

would also update the definition of 

homeless to match in part the one used 

by the Department of Housing and 

Urban Development (HUD). The 

proposed rule would further clarify that 

the services provided by the HCHV 

program through non-VA communitybased providers must include case 

management services, including nonclinical case management, as 

appropriate. 

DATES: Comment Date: Comments must 

be received by VA on or before July 14, 

2014. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be 

submitted by email through http://

www.regulations.gov; by mail or handdelivery to Director, Regulation Policy 

and Management (02REG), Department 

of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont 

Avenue NW., Room 1068, Washington, 

DC 20420; or by fax to (202) 273–9026. 

Comments should indicate that they are 

submitted in response to ‘‘RIN 2900– 

AO71, Health Care for Homeless 

Veterans Program.’’ Copies of comments 

received will be available for public 

inspection in the Office of Regulation 

Policy and Management, Room 1068, 

between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 

p.m., Monday through Friday (except 

holidays). Please call (202) 461–4902 for 

an appointment. (This is not a toll-free 

number.) In addition, during the 

comment period, comments may be 

viewed online through the Federal 

Docket Management System (FDMS) at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert Hallett, Health Care for Homeless 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS