Special Transfers for Unemployment Compensation Modernization and Administration and Relief From Interest on Advances, 48602-48612 [E9-22917]
Download as PDF
48602
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices
Rowlett.John@dol.gov, along with an
original printed copy. Mr. Rowlett can
be reached at (202) 693–9827 (voice), or
(202) 693–9801 (facsimile).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Contact the employee listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this notice.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Under section 103(c) of the Federal
Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, the
Mine Safety and Health Administration
(MSHA) is required to ‘‘ * * * issue
regulations required operators to
maintain accurate records of employee
exposures to potentially toxic materials
or harmful physical agents which are
required to be monitored or measured
under any applicable mandatory health
or safety standard promulgated under
this Act.’’
Gamma radiation occurs anywhere
that radioactive materials are present,
and has been associated with lunch
cancer and other debilitating
occupational diseases. Gamma radiation
hazards may be found near radiation
sources at surface operations using Xray machines, weightometers, nuclear
and diffraction units.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
II. Desired Focus of Comments
MSHA is particularly interested in
comments that:
• Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
• Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
• Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submissions
of responses.
A copy of the proposed information
collection request can be obtained by
contacting the employee listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this notice, or viewed on the
Internet by accessing the MSHA home
page (https://www.msha.gov) and then
choosing Statutory and Regulatory
Information and Federal Register
Documents.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Sep 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
III. Current Actions
Annual gamma radiation surveys are
required to be conducted—in all
underground mines where radioactive
ores are mined. Where the average
gamma radiation measurements are in
excess of 2.0 milliroentgens per hour in
the working place, all persons affected
are to be provided with gamma
radiation dosimeters and records of
cumulative individual gamma radiation
exposures are to be kept.
Type of Review: Extension.
Agency: Mine Safety and Health
Administration.
Title: Gamma Radiation Exposure
Records.
OMB Number: 1219–0039.
Recordkeeping: Records of cumulative
occupational radiation exposures aid in
the protection of workers, in the control
of subsequent radiation exposure, and
are used by MSHA in evaluation of the
effectiveness of the protection program
in demonstrating compliance with
regulatory requirements.
Frequency: Annually.
Affected Public: Business or other forprofit.
Respondents: 4.
Total Burden Hours: 8 hours.
Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):
$0.
Total Burden Cost (operating/
maintaining): $0.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and/or
included in the request for Office of
Management and Budget approval of the
information collection request; they will
also become a matter of public record.
Dated at Arlington, Virginia, this 17th day
of September 2009.
John Rowlett,
Director, Management Services Division.
[FR Doc. E9–22882 Filed 9–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–43–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
Special Transfers for Unemployment
Compensation Modernization and
Administration and Relief From
Interest on Advances
AGENCY: Employment and Training
Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: The Employment and
Training Administration has provided
guidance to State workforce agencies to
assist them in qualifying for the
incentive payments to modernize their
State unemployment compensation (UC)
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
law as well as to clarify the special
transfer of funds, the suspension of
interest on Federal loan advances and
Federal tax on UC authorized by Public
Law 111–5. The original guidance was
issued as Unemployment Insurance
Program Letter (UIPL) No. 14–09 on
February 26, 2009 (available at: https://
wdr.doleta.gov/directives/attach/UIPL/
UIPL14–09.pdf). Additional guidance
was issued on March 19, 2009 as UIPL
14–09, Change 1 (available at: https://
wdr.doleta.gov/directives/attach/UIPL/
UIPL14–09c1.pdf). Both UIPLs are
published below to inform the public.
There are no rescissions on this
continuing guidance.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
UIPL No. 14–09—Special Transfers for
Unemployment Compensation
Modernization and Administration and
Relief From Interest on Advances
1. Purpose. To advise States of
amendments to Federal law providing
for unemployment compensation (UC)
modernization incentive payments to
States, a special administrative transfer
to States, relief from interest on
advances to State unemployment funds,
and the partial suspension of Federal
income tax on UC.
2. References. The Assistance for
Unemployed Workers and Struggling
Families Act, Title II of Division B of
Public Law No. 111–5, enacted February
17, 2009; Section 1007 of Public Law
111–5; the Social Security Act (SSA);
the Federal Unemployment Tax Act
(FUTA); Unemployment Insurance
Program Letter (UIPL) No. 39–97; and
Training and Employment Guidance
Letter (TEGL) No. 18–01.
3. Background. Public Law 111–5
made the following changes affecting
the UC program:
• Extended the Emergency UC
program, commonly known as EUC08.
• Created a new federally-funded
program which temporarily increases
UC benefits by $25 a week.
• Temporarily modified provisions in
the permanent Federal-State extended
benefits program.
• Provided for two special
distributions from the Unemployment
Trust Fund (UTF) to the States.
• For States receiving advances to pay
benefits under Title XII, SSA, waived
interest due on these advances for a
specified period.
• Suspended the Federal income tax
on the first $2,400 paid in UC for tax
year 2009.
The first three items are addressed in
separate UIPLs. This UIPL addresses the
special distributions, the provisions
affecting Title XII loans, and the
taxation of UC benefits.
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices
In general, the first special
distribution relates to UC
‘‘modernization incentive payments.’’
The total amount available for all States
is $7 billion. To obtain its share, the
State must make an application to the
Department of Labor demonstrating that
its UC law contains certain benefit
eligibility provisions. Attachment I
discusses eligibility for these incentive
payments and the application and
approval process. Attachments II and III
discuss these matters in greater detail.
The last date on which an incentive
distribution may be made is September
30, 2011, so applications must be
received no later than August 22, 2011.
The second distribution is a ‘‘special
transfer’’ of $500 million to the States’
accounts in the UTF to be used for
certain administrative purposes. This
administrative transfer is made
regardless of whether the State qualifies
for a modernization incentive payment.
States do not need to apply to receive
these amounts. Attachment IV discusses
this administrative transfer and the
permissible uses of the amounts
transferred. Attachment VII contains the
amounts distributed under this
administrative transfer and each State’s
potential share under the modernization
incentive payments.
Attachment V discusses the
provisions related to suspension of
interest on advances and the partial
suspension of Federal income tax on
UC. Attachment VI sets forth the text of
the amendments discussed in this UIPL.
4. Action. State administrators should
distribute this advisory to appropriate
staff.
5. Inquiries. Questions should be
addressed to your Regional Office.
6. Attachments.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Attachment I—Modernization Incentive
Payments—Overview
Attachment II—Modernization Incentive
Payments—Base Period Provision—
Questions and Answers
Attachment III—Modernization Incentive
Payments—Other Eligibility Provisions—
Questions and Answers
Attachment IV—Special Administrative
Transfers—Questions and Answers
Attachment V—Suspensions—Interest on
Advances and Federal Taxation of UC
Attachment VI—Text of Sections 2003 and
2004 of Public Law 111–5
Attachment VII—UC Modernization
Distributions—Amount
Attachment I
Modernization Incentive Payments—
Overview
In General
Section 2003(a) of Public Law 111–5
added new subsection (f) to Section 903,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Sep 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
SSA, to provide for incentive payments
to States.
These incentive payments are
calculated in the same manner as a
‘‘Reed Act’’ distribution. This means
each State’s share is based on its
proportionate share of FUTA taxable
wages multiplied by the $7 billion
authorized by the amendments. For
purposes of computing each State’s
proportionate share, the Secretary of
Labor will use the taxable wages that
would have been used for calculating
any Reed Act distribution occurring on
October 1, 2008. As provided by Section
903(f)(1)(B), SSA, tax year 2007 data is
used for determining each State’s share.
A State’s share will be reserved in the
Federal Unemployment Account (FUA)
in the UTF for purposes of making
incentive payments. As of the close of
Federal fiscal year 2011 (that is,
September 30, 2011), this limitation
expires, and any unused amounts again
become available for any FUA use.
A State’s eligibility for its maximum
incentive payment is conditioned on its
law containing specific provisions:
• To obtain the first one-third of its
share, the State law must provide for
either a base period that uses recent
wages or an alternative base period
(ABP) using recent wages. This ‘‘base
period provision’’ is discussed in
Attachment II.
• If a State qualifies under this base
period provision, it may obtain the
remaining two-thirds if its State law
contains two of four options related to
benefit eligibility. These options are
discussed in Attachment III.
State Applications
In General. The State must apply to
the Department of Labor to receive any
incentive payment. A complete
application must document which
provisions of State law meet the
requirements for obtaining an incentive
payment as interpreted by this UIPL.
The application must also describe how
the State intends to use any incentive
payment to improve or strengthen the
State’s UC program. Attachment II
discusses what constitutes a complete
application for purposes of the base
period provision and Attachment III
discusses what constitutes a complete
application for purposes of the other
benefit eligibility provisions.
Applications are to be signed by the
State agency administrator and
addressed to: Cheryl Atkinson,
Administrator, Office of Workforce
Security, 200 Constitution Avenue,
NW., Room S–4231, Washington, DC
20210.
States may submit applications by
mail, fax, or e-mail. States may fax
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48603
applications to 202–693–2874 to the
attention of the Division of UC
Legislation. E-mail submissions should
be sent to Atkinson.Cheryl@dol.gov with
a cc to Hildebrand.Gerard@dol.gov.
Copies should be provided to the
appropriate Regional Office. For
purposes of determining the date of
receipt (as described immediately
below), the date of receipt in the
National Office will be used.
Review Process. Within 30 days of
receipt by the Department of a State’s
complete application, the State will be
notified whether it qualifies for an
incentive payment. If it does, the
Secretary of Treasury will transfer the
amount of the incentive payment within
seven days of receipt of the
Department’s certification. Since all
incentive payments must be made
before October 1, 2011, and since the
Department must have adequate time to
review any application, all applications
must be received by the Department no
later than August 22, 2011.
To expedite processing of
applications and distribution of
incentive payments to the States, the
Department is providing for a two-tiered
application process under which a State
may make one application regarding the
base period provisions and a separate
application regarding the other benefit
eligibility provisions. Nothing prohibits
States from making a single application.
However, since the Department
anticipates relatively swift action on
base period applications, it may be
advantageous for States to make two
applications.
State Law Status. Applications should
only be made under provisions of State
laws that are currently in effect as
permanent law and not subject to
discontinuation. This means that the
provision is not subject to any
condition—such as an expiration date,
the balance in the State’s
unemployment fund, or a legislative
appropriation—that might prevent the
provision from becoming effective, or
that might suspend, discontinue, or
nullify it.
There is one exception to this
limitation. In some cases, a State might
enact a new provision of law to qualify
for the incentive payment, but delay its
effective date due to implementation
requirements. In these cases, if the State
law provision takes effect within 12
months of the date of the Secretary of
Labor’s certification, then the provision
will be considered to be in effect as of
the date of the Secretary’s certification
to the Secretary of Treasury. In the case
of a provision that is not effective until
more than 12 months (which may be the
case with ABP provisions) the State
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
48604
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices
should time its application so that the
Secretary’s certification will be made no
more than 12 months prior to its law’s
effective date. Thus, for example, since
the Secretary must rule on any
application within 30 days, the
application should be submitted no
more than 13 months before the State
law’s effective date. Note, however, as
discussed above, the Department will
not consider applications received after
August 22, 2011. As a result, the latest
effective date of a provision must be on
or before September 21, 2012.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Receipt and Use of Incentive Payments
Following the Secretary’s certification
for an incentive payment, the entire
amount certified will be transferred to
the State’s account in the UTF. A State
may use its incentive payment: (1) To
pay UC (including dependents’
allowances); or (2) upon appropriation
of its State legislature, to pay UC and
employment service administrative
costs. The conditions for administrative
use of the incentive payment are the
same as those applicable to the $8
billion Reed Act distribution made in
2002. Refer to Q&As 9 through 19 and
Q&A 21 in Attachment I to TEGL 18–01
for guidance. Like the $8 billion Reed
Act distribution, there is no time limit
on the use of the incentive payment for
benefit or administrative purposes.
Incentive payments available for the
payment of UC must, however, be
expended before the State may obtain an
advance to pay UC under Title XII, SSA.
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
Statement
The public reporting burden for this
collection of information is estimated to
average approximately eight hours per
response including time for gathering
and maintaining the data needed to
complete the required disclosure.
This UIPL contains a new collection
of information in the form of an
application for UC Modernization
Incentive Payments. According to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub.
L. 104–13), no persons are required to
respond to a collection of information
unless such collection displays a valid
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) control number. The Department
is planning to submit an Information
Collection Request (ICR) to OMB
requesting a new OMB Control Number.
The Department notes that a Federal
agency cannot conduct or sponsor a
collection of information unless it is
approved by OMB under the PRA, and
displays a currently valid OMB control
number, and the public is not required
to respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Sep 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
control number. See 44 U.S.C. 3507.
Also, notwithstanding any other
provisions of law, no person shall be
subject to penalty for failing to comply
with a collection of information if the
collection of information does not
display a currently valid OMB control
number. See 44 U.S.C. 3512. The
Department will notify States of OMB’s
decision upon review of the
Department’s ICR, including any
changes that may result from this review
process.
Modernization Incentive Payments
Base Period Provisions
Questions and Answers
II–1. Question. What provisions must
my law contain to qualify for an
incentive payment under the base
period provision?
Answer. There are two options:
• A regular base period that includes
the most recently completed calendar
quarter before the start of the benefit
year, or
• An ABP that includes the most
recently completed calendar quarter,
when the claimant cannot meet
monetary qualifying requirements using
a ‘‘regular’’ base period that excludes
this quarter.
II–2. Question: I believe my State law
qualifies for the incentive payment.
What should my application State?
Answer: The application must:
• Identify the State;
• Cite the specific base period
provision of State law supporting the
application;
• Certify that the provision of State
law is either currently in effect or will
become effective for claims filed on or
after a specified date;
• Contain a certification that the
provision is permanent (that is, not
temporary) and is not subject to
discontinuation under any
circumstances other than repeal by the
legislature;
• Address how the State intends to
use the incentive payment to improve or
strengthen its UC program; and
• Attach the relevant provision of
State law.
II–3. Question: Is the Department
aware of any existing ABP provisions
that will not qualify for the incentive
payment?
Answer: Yes. A provision providing
that an ABP will be used only if the
unemployment fund is above a certain
‘‘solvency’’ threshold would not qualify
because the ABP is subject to
discontinuation under a specified
condition. Also, a State law that permits
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Attachment III
Modernization Incentive Payments
Other Eligibility Provision
Questions and Answers
Attachment II
PO 00000
use of an ABP only after a specified
number of days have elapsed since the
end of the last completed quarter in
order for wage records to be received
would not qualify because it does not
permit use of the ABP during the days
immediately following the end of the
quarter.
Sfmt 4703
In General
III–1. Question: If my State qualifies
for the one-third incentive payment
related to its base period provision,
what provisions must my law contain to
qualify for certification for the
remaining two-thirds of its incentive
payment?
Answer: In brief, a State law must
contain provisions carrying out at least
two of the following:
• UC is payable to certain individuals
seeking only part-time work.
• An individual is not disqualified
from UC for separations due to certain
compelling family reasons.
• An additional 26 weeks of UC is
paid to exhaustees who are enrolled in
and making satisfactory progress in
certain training programs.
• Dependents’ allowances of at least
$15 per dependent per week, subject to
a minimum aggregation, are paid to
eligible beneficiaries.
Part-Time Workers
III–2. Question: What is the part-time
work option?
Answer: State law must provide that
an individual will not be denied UC
under any provision relating to
availability for work, active search for
work, or refusal to accept work, solely
because such individual is seeking only
part-time work as defined by the
Secretary of Labor.
The State law may, however, deny
benefits if a majority of the weeks of
work in the individual’s base period do
not include part-time work. States are
not required to have this exception in
their laws in order to qualify for the
incentive payment under this option. In
fact, a State may determine that an
individual who has previously worked
full time may be eligible for UC even if
the individual limits him/herself to
seeking part-time work.
III–3. Question: For purposes of
‘‘seeking only part-time work,’’ how
does the Department define ‘‘seeking
only part-time work’’?
Answer: For purposes of the incentive
payment, the Department defines
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices
‘‘seeking only part-time work’’ as work
meeting any one of the following
situations:
• Situations where the individual is
willing to work at least 20 hours per
week.
• Situations where the individual is
available for a number of hours per
week that are comparable to the
individual’s part-time work experience
in the base period. For example, if the
individual worked 16 hours per week in
the base period, the State may require
the individual to seek jobs offering at
least 16 hours of work. If the individual
worked 32 hours per week, the State
may require the individual to seek jobs
offering at least 32 hours of work.
• Situations where the individual is
available for hours that are comparable
to the individual’s work at the time of
the most recent separation from
employment. This is similar to the
preceding definition except that it
allows the State to take into account
periods between the end of the base
period and the filing of the first claim
for UC.
The Department will approve a State’s
application if the State uses any one of
the above definitions. The State may
also use a combination of these
definitions. For example, a State may
define part-time work as work having
comparable hours to the individual’s
work in the base period, except that an
individual must be available for at least
20 hours of work per week.
A State may also have a broader
definition of part-time work. For
example, the State may require the
individual to be available for only 10 or
more hours per week. Of course, the
State may not allow the individual to
limit his or her availability to the extent
that it constitutes a withdrawal from the
labor market. (See 20 CFR 604.5(a)(1).)
III–4. Question: My State law provides
for payment to individuals seeking parttime work only if they have worked
part-time during the entire base period.
Would an application containing this
limitation be certified?
Answer: No. To qualify for the
incentive payment, a State law must
permit an individual to seek part-time
work, except that the State may deny
benefits if a majority of weeks of work
in the base period do not include parttime work (i.e., were full-time).
Requiring part-time work throughout
the entire base period is more restrictive
than the ‘‘majority’’ standard and would
not qualify.
III–5. Question: My State law provides
for payment to individuals seeking parttime work only if my agency determines
the individual has a legitimate reason to
limit employment to part-time work.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Sep 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
Would an application containing this
limitation be certified?
Answer: No. To qualify for the
incentive payment, a State law must
permit an individual to seek part-time
work, except that the State may deny
benefits if a majority of weeks of work
in the base period do not include parttime work (i.e., were full-time).
Requiring agency approval is more
restrictive.
III–6. Question: My State law provides
for payment to individuals who have a
history of part-time work. Would an
application containing this limitation be
certified?
Answer: It depends on how the State
interprets and applies this provision. To
obtain certification, the State’s
application must demonstrate that, at a
minimum, all individuals who work the
majority of weeks in the base period in
part-time employment will not be
determined ineligible because they are
seeking only part-time work.
III–7. Question: My State will use the
option that permits us to examine
whether the majority of weeks of work
in the individual’s base period are in
part-time work. If the individual worked
40 weeks in the base period and 21
weeks are part-time, must my State’s
law provide that this individual may
limit his/her availability to only parttime work?
Answer: Yes, the State’s law must
provide that the individual may limit
his/her availability to only part-time
work under the facts as stated. Since the
individual has worked the majority of
weeks in the base period in part-time
work, this individual must be allowed
to seek only part-time work, as defined
by the Department. For purposes of this
option, a ‘‘week of work’’ is a calendar
week.
III–8. Question: My State law requires
an individual to be available for the
same schedule of work as previously
worked. For example, if the individual
worked (either part-time or full-time)
during specific hours Monday through
Friday, the individual will be denied if
he or she is not available for the same
schedule on these calendar days. Will
my State’s application be certified if it
contains this provision?
Answer: Yes. The Federal requirement
is that an individual not be denied
‘‘solely because the individual is
seeking only part-time work.’’ In this
case, the State is placing another,
additional test of availability on all
individuals seeking work, regardless of
whether the work is full-time (as
defined under State law) or part-time (as
defined consistent with Q&A III–3).
In cases where a test applies only to
part-time workers, the Department will
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48605
evaluate the test to determine if it is
consistent with the definition of
‘‘seeking suitable part-time work’’
contained in this UIPL. For example, if
a State required that only individuals
seeking part-time work be available for
the same work schedule, the State’s
application would be denied since this
UIPL does not interpret ‘‘suitable parttime work’’ to include such a
requirement. If a State test, although
worded in a way that is applicable to
both full-time and part-time workers, is
in fact applicable only to part-time
workers, it will be reviewed as
described in this paragraph.
Quits Due to Compelling Family
Reasons
III–9. Question: For purposes of
qualifying for the incentive payment,
what are ‘‘compelling family reasons?’’
Answer: To qualify for the incentive
payment using the ‘‘compelling family
reason’’ option, the State law must
provide that an individual will not be
disqualified for separating from work
under any and all of the following
circumstances:
• Domestic violence (verified by
reasonable and confidential
documentation as the State law may
require) which causes the individual
reasonably to believe that the
individual’s continued employment
would jeopardize the safety of the
individual or of any member of the
individual’s immediate family (as
defined by the U.S. Department of Labor
(Department)).
• The illness or disability of a
member of the individual’s immediate
family (as these terms are defined by the
Department).
• The need for the individual to
accompany his/her spouse: (1) To a
place from which it is impractical for
such individual to commute; and (2)
due to a change in location of the
spouse’s employment.
III–10. Question: An employer
discharges an individual for chronic
absenteeism that constitutes misconduct
under my State’s law. Only after the
separation does the individual indicate
that the absences were to care for a
member of his/her immediate family.
Would my State’s application be denied
if individuals in this situation were
disqualified under a misconduct
separation?
Answer: No. The Federal law provides
that an ‘‘individual shall not be
disqualified from [UC] for separating
from employment’’ for compelling
family reasons. In some cases, such as
when the individual fails to advise the
employer of an absence, the basis for the
separation may go beyond ‘‘compelling
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
48606
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices
family reasons.’’ That is, misconduct
may exist despite the existence of what
otherwise would be compelling family
reasons, and the State may deny the
individual under its misconduct
provisions.
To be certified, a State law must
reasonably define misconduct. The fact
that the employer initiated the discharge
does not mean misconduct exists. For
example, an individual who is
hospitalized as a result of domestic
violence may be unable to contact the
employer. If the individual is
discharged in such cases, the State law,
to be certified, must consider the
individual to have separated from work
due to compelling family reasons.
Similarly, if the employer discharges an
individual who has informed the
employer of expected absences to care
for an ill child, the State law must
consider the individual to have been
separated from work due to compelling
family reasons.
Many State misconduct provisions
have been interpreted to require a
willful and wanton disregard of the
employer’s interest. The Department
anticipates that these State law
provisions are generally expected to
meet the conditions pertaining to
compelling family reasons since
separations for compelling family
reasons do not in themselves constitute
a willful and wanton disregard of the
employer’s interest. However, to assure
the State’s law does not provide for a
denial due to misconduct for such
separations, the State’s application will
need to address the application of its
misconduct provisions to compelling
family reasons.
III–11. Question: For purposes of the
domestic violence provision, what is
meant by ‘‘verified by such reasonable
and confidential documentation as the
State law may require?’’
Answer: As in other UC adjudications,
the State must gather sufficient facts to
support any eligibility determination,
which may include verification of the
individual’s belief that his/her
continued employment would
jeopardize the safety of the individual or
a member of the immediate family.
When the State verifies the individual’s
belief, the Department has determined
the State may reasonably require a
statement supporting recent domestic
violence from a qualified professional
from whom the individual has sought
assistance such as a counselor, shelter
worker, member of the clergy, attorney,
or health worker.
The State must accept any other kind
of evidence that reasonably proves
domestic violence. The State may
accept, but may not require, as evidence
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Sep 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
(1) an active or recently issued
protective or other order documenting
domestic violence, or (2) a police record
documenting recent domestic violence
as doing so will create an unreasonable
bar to benefits.
If the State obtains one instance of
information that adequately verifies the
individual’s belief, it would defeat the
purpose of the new Federal provisions
for the State to burden the individual by
requiring additional information.
Therefore, any application that indicates
that multiple verifications are necessary
will not be certified.
At a minimum, for purposes of
holding information about domestic
violence confidential, the Department’s
regulations at 20 CFR Part 603
addressing the confidentiality of UC
information will apply, as it does to all
confidential UC information. Given the
sensitivity of the kind of information
that may be needed to prove domestic
violence, as well as the confidential
sources from which it may have to be
obtained, the Department views the
language about ‘‘confidential
information’’ as an authorization to seek
information which may come from
confidential sources and as a reminder
that such information must be kept
confidential.
III–12. Question: For purposes of the
domestic violence and illness/disability
options, what is meant by ‘‘immediate
family member?’’
Answer: At a minimum, a State must
include spouses, parents and minor
children under the age of 18 in its
definition of ‘‘immediate family
member’’ for its provision to qualify for
certification. States may provide for a
more inclusive definition (for example,
including grandparents, sisters,
brothers, domestic partners, adult
children or foster children), but they are
not required to do so for their provisions
to be certified.
III–13. Question: For purposes of the
illness/disability option, what is meant
by ‘‘illness’’ and ‘‘disability?’’
Answer: ‘‘Illness’’ means a verified
illness which necessitates the care of the
ill person for a period of time longer
than the employer is willing to grant
leave (paid or otherwise). Similarly,
‘‘disability’’ means a verified disability
which necessitates the care of the
disabled person for a period of time
longer than the employer is willing to
grant leave (paid or otherwise) for.
‘‘Disability’’ encompasses all types of
disability, including (1) mental and
physical disability; (2) permanent and
temporary disabilities; and (3) partial
and total disabilities. What is key is that
the individual’s illness or disability
necessitates care by another individual
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
and the employer does not
accommodate the employee’s request for
time-off.
This is a minimum standard for a
State to receive its incentive payment.
States may have broader eligibility
provisions. However, a State law
provision would not be certified if it has
a narrower definition of illness or
disability or provides for overly
restrictive limits on the types of
verification of illness. For example, if
the State requires a medical doctor to
verify an illness or disability when other
sources of verification are available, the
application would not be accepted. As
another example, if a State law’s
provisions only apply when the family
member is terminally ill, the provision
will not be certified.
III–14. Question: My State law
pertaining to separations to care for
family members is limited to cases
where no reasonable, alternative care
was available. Would this provision be
certified?
Answer: No. The new Federal
provisions broadly require, as a
condition of certification, that the State
law not disqualify an individual
separating because of the ‘‘illness or
disability of a family member. * * *’’
The Act does not permit a State to limit
eligibility to particular circumstances
surrounding a separation for this reason.
Thus, a provision would not be certified
if it applies only when no reasonable,
alternative care is available.
III–15. Question: For purposes of
quitting to accompany a spouse to a new
location from which it is impractical to
commute, what is meant by
‘‘impractical?’’
Answer: What is ‘‘impractical’’ will be
based on commuting patterns in the
locality. States should assure that their
provisions reasonably reflect these
commuting patterns.
III–16. Question: My State looks at
whether it is impractical for the
individual to commute from the new
location. We do not examine the reason
why the spouse relocated. Would this
provision qualify for an incentive
payment?
Answer: In this case, the State permits
payment of UC in all situations required
for the State to qualify for an incentive
payment. State law may provide for
broader eligibility than required for
certification, such as where it is not
practical to commute from the new
location.
III–17. Question: Do the provisions on
compelling family reasons affect my
State’s availability requirements as a
condition of claimant eligibility?
Answer: There is no effect. States
must continue to require, at a minimum,
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
that individuals be able to and available
for work as defined by the Department’s
regulations at 20 CFR part 604. The new
Federal provisions on compelling family
reasons relate only to whether the
reason for quitting work is
disqualifying, and do not address issues
related to the individual’s continuing
unemployment. Thus, for example, an
individual who quits employment for a
compelling family reason may not be
disqualified for quitting, but the
individual will be ineligible if
unavailable for work.
Training Benefits
III–18. Question: If a State elects the
training benefit option, under what
conditions must it be payable?
Answer: The State law must provide
that a training benefit be payable to any
individual who is unemployed (as
determined under State law, including
partial and part-total unemployment),
has exhausted all rights to regular UC,
and is enrolled in and making
satisfactory progress in either:
• A State-approved training program,
or
• A job training program authorized
under the Workforce Investment Act of
1998 (WIA).
The State law must provide for
payment of the training benefit to
individuals who are enrolled in and
making satisfactory progress in both of
the above types of programs. However,
the State law is not required to provide
for payment of the training benefit to an
individual who is receiving ‘‘similar
stipends’’ or other training allowances
which can be used for non-training
costs. (In addition, the State may treat
such stipends as disqualifying income.)
In this case, ‘‘similar stipend’’ means an
amount provided under a program with
similar aims, such as providing training
to increase employability, and in
approximately the same amounts.
WIA or other approved job training
programs for which training benefits are
paid may be limited to those that
prepare an individual for entry into a
high-demand occupation if the
individual has been:
• Separated from a declining
occupation, or
• Involuntarily and indefinitely
separated from employment as a result
of a permanent reduction of operations
at the individual’s place of employment.
The requirements related to the job
training program are minimum
requirements for purposes of
certification. If the State pays training
benefits to a broader class of individuals
participating in training than specified
above, the State will meet the
requirements for this option. For
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Sep 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
example, a State law may pay additional
training benefits to any individual who
is preparing for a job in a ‘‘demand
occupation’’ as opposed to a ‘‘highdemand occupation.’’ However, a State
law would not qualify for certification if
it limits training benefits to a narrower
class of individuals. For example, if the
training benefits are payable only to
individuals in job training programs
leading to high-wage occupations, the
State law would not be certified because
the Federal provision does not authorize
a high-wage restriction.
Whether an occupation is ‘‘declining’’
or ‘‘high-demand’’ will be determined
by the State using available labor market
information data.
III–19. Question: How must the
amount of training benefits be
determined for purposes of this option?
Answer: The amount of UC payable
for a week of unemployment must, at a
minimum, equal the individual’s
weekly benefit amount (including
dependents’ allowances) for the most
recent benefit year less any deductible
income as determined under State law.
The total amount of UC payable to any
individual must equal at least 26 times
the individual’s average weekly benefit
amount (including dependents’
allowances) for the most recent benefit
year.
III–20. Question: What is meant by
‘‘State-approved training program’’?
Answer: A program that the State
determines is reasonably expected to
lead to employment in an occupation,
including high-demand occupations.
III–21. Question: What evidence may
my State require for purposes of
determining whether an individual is
making satisfactory progress in the
training program?
Answer: The State may require
reasonable evidence of satisfactory
progress, such as reports from training
providers and evidence of attending
training when attendance is a necessary
part of such training.
III–22. Question: My State has a
training benefit provision, but amounts
must be appropriated each year by the
legislature. Will this provision qualify
for the incentive payment?
Answer: No. To qualify for an
incentive distribution, the State law
provision may not be subject to
discontinuation. A provision subject to
appropriation may be capped with the
result that it could be discontinued
within the State’s fiscal year for which
the appropriation is made. Further,
there is no guarantee any appropriation
will be made for future years.
III–23. Question: May the training
benefit be paid after federally-funded
extensions of UC?
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48607
Answer: Yes. The training benefit may
be paid after the individual exhausts
eligibility under the current Emergency
Unemployment Compensation program
or under the permanent Federal-State
Extended Benefits program.
III–24. Question: May eligibility for
the training benefit be terminated by the
expiration of a benefit year, or may it be
limited to individuals who have not
previously received it?
Answer: No. Federal law does not
contain these limitations.
Dependents’ Allowances
III–25. Question: What is meant by
‘‘dependent’’ for purposes of qualifying
for an incentive payment under the
option related to dependents’
allowances, as well as in other
provisions relating to incentive
payments?
Answer: The term ‘‘dependent’’ is
defined under State law for all of these
purposes.
III–26. Question: With respect to the
dependents’ allowances option, what
dollar amounts must be paid as
dependents’ allowances to qualify for
the incentive payment?
Answer: The State must pay an
amount equaling at least $15 per
dependent per week. However, the State
may cap the total allowance paid to an
individual for dependents at $50 per
week of unemployment or 50 percent of
the individual’s weekly benefit amount
for the benefit year, whichever is less.
The State is not, however, required to
pay the full dependents’ allowance
when the individual has earnings for the
week. Instead, the State may provide for
a reasonable reduction in the amount of
any such allowance for such week. A
State law will qualify for certification
under this ‘‘reasonableness’’ test if it
provides for the same pro rata reduction
in the dependents’ allowance as was
applied to the weekly benefit amount.
For example, if the individual is eligible
for one-half of the weekly benefit
amount, the State may reduce the
dependents’ allowance by one-half. If a
State applies another reduction test that
it believes is reasonable, the State’s
application must explain why the test is
reasonable.
III–27. Question: My State does not
pay a dependents’ allowance if the
individual qualifies for the maximum
weekly benefit amount. Would my
State’s dependents’ allowances
provision qualify?
Answer: No. The new Federal
provisions require, as a condition of
certification, that a State pay
dependents’ allowances, but permits
some limitation on their aggregation.
Because this State provision places an
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
48608
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
additional limitation on dependents’
allowances, the Department would not
certify it. Similarly, the Department
would not certify a State provision that
does not pay dependents’ allowances to
individuals who qualify for the
minimum weekly benefit amount.
Regular Compensation
III–28. Question: The options relating
to part-time work, compelling family
reasons, and dependents’ allowances
specify that they must be applied to
‘‘regular compensation.’’ Does this mean
they are not required to be applied to
other payments of UC?
Answer: For UC programs where
benefits are funded by the Federal
government, Federal ‘‘equal treatment’’
requirements apply. Therefore, except
where the laws and regulations
governing these programs provide
otherwise, benefits for the following UC
programs must be paid in the same
amount, on the same terms, and under
the same conditions as regular
compensation:
• The permanent Federal-State
Extended Benefits program.
• The UC programs for former Federal
employees and ex-military personnel.
Moreover, these programs are also
included in the definition of ‘‘regular
compensation’’ in Section 205(2) of the
Federal-State Extended Unemployment
Compensation Act of 1970, as amended.
• The current emergency UC
program, commonly called the EUC08
program.
• The Disaster Unemployment
Assistance program.
• Trade Readjustment Allowances
payable under the Trade Act, as
amended.
However, unless a State’s law
contains an ‘‘equal treatment’’
requirement for ‘‘additional
compensation,’’ it need not apply the
requirements relating to part-time work,
compelling family reasons and, with
one possible exception for the training
benefit (explained in the next
paragraph), dependents’ allowances in
the payment of additional
compensation. Additional
compensation is not regular
compensation, but, rather,
compensation totally financed by a State
and payable under State law by reason
of high unemployment or other special
factors. Thus, the limitation to ‘‘regular
compensation’’ means, for example, that
for a State’s provision relating to parttime workers to be certified, the State
law need not pay additional
compensation to part-time workers.
Note that benefits under the training
benefits option are a form of additional
compensation. However, as discussed
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Sep 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
above for the training benefits option,
the State must include dependents’
allowances in calculating the
individual’s weekly benefit amount for
the training benefit. Those dependents’
allowances must be calculated for the
training benefit in the same manner as
they are calculated for regular
compensation. Thus, if a State selects its
dependents’ allowances provision for
certification, it must apply it to the
training benefit.
Applications for Incentive Payments
III–29. Question: I believe my State
law qualifies for an incentive payment
under two or more of the above options.
What should my application State?
Answer: For each option under which
the State is applying, the application
must:
• Name the State;
• Cite to and attach the specific
provisions of State law supporting the
application;
• Certify that the provision of State
law is either currently in effect or will
become effective for claims filed after a
specified date;
• Contain a certification that the
provision is permanent (that is, not
temporary) and is not subject to
discontinuation under any
circumstances other than repeal by the
legislature; and
• Address how the State intends to
use the incentive payment to improve or
strengthen its UC program.
The following additional information
is also required:
• When an application is based on an
interpretation of State law rather than
explicit statutory language (as may be
the case under the options for part-time
workers and compelling family reasons),
the State must provide evidence of its
interpretation. This evidence may
include regulations, court cases,
precedent decisions, or administrative
procedures. An application that merely
asserts a provision of State law is
interpreted in a certain way will be
deemed incomplete and denied.
Similarly, an application that cites to a
court case as an authoritative
interpretation will be deemed
incomplete and denied unless the State
provides regulations or procedures
demonstrating the court case has been
implemented. The application must
describe these authorities and attach
copies of any relevant material.
• For an application pertaining to
compelling family reasons, the State
must (1) explain its requirements for
verification of domestic violence and
why they are reasonable, and (2)
describe how the State’s misconduct
provisions are consistent with Q&A III–
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
10. The application must attach copies
of any relevant material supporting the
application’s statements.
• For an application that provides for
a ‘‘reasonable reduction’’ in dependents’
allowances for weeks with earnings,
describe the reduction and why it is
believed to be reasonable.
III–30. Question: My State has
submitted an application under the base
period provision for the first one-third
of its incentive payment. Should we
wait until that application is approved
prior to submitting an application for
the remaining two-thirds?
Answer: No. It is not necessary to wait
for approval of the base period
application. However, the Department
will not certify the State for the
remaining two-thirds until it certifies
the base period provision.
Attachment IV
Special Administrative Transfers
Questions and Answers
IV–1. Question: How was Federal law
amended to authorize the special
administrative transfer?
Answer: Section 2003(a) of Public
Law 111–5 added a new subsection (g)
to Section 903, SSA, to make a special
administrative transfer to all States
totaling $500,000,000 within 30 days of
the date of enactment, which was
February 17, 2009. A State need take no
action to receive its share of the
distribution.
IV–2. Question: How is my State’s
share of the special administrative
transfer determined?
Answer: It is calculated in the same
manner as a ‘‘Reed Act’’ distribution.
This means each State’s share is based
on its proportionate share of FUTA
taxable wages multiplied by the
$500,000,000 authorized by the
amendments. For purposes of
computing each State’s proportionate
share, the Secretary of Labor will use
the taxable wages that would have been
used for calculating any Reed Act
distribution occurring on October 1,
2008. As provided by the SSA, data for
tax year 2007 is used for determining
each State’s share.
IV–3. Question: What are the
permissible uses of the administrative
transfer?
Answer: The administrative transfer
may be used only for—
• Implementing and administering
the provisions of State law that qualify
the State for the incentive payments;
• Improved outreach to individuals
who might be eligible by virtue of these
provisions;
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
48609
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices
• The improvement of UC benefit and
tax operations, including responding to
increased demand for UC; and
• Staff-assisted reemployment
services for UC claimants.
IV–4. Question: Must my State
legislature appropriate these special
administrative transfers?
Answer: Federal law does not require
such an appropriation. (This is unlike
the incentive payments discussed in
Attachment I, which must be
appropriated by the State legislature
before they can be used for
administrative purposes.) However,
nothing prohibits a State legislature
from appropriating such money or from
attaching more specific or limiting
conditions to the use of such money.
IV–5. Question: Do I need to amend
my State’s UC law?
Answer: Most State UC laws contain
permanent provisions regarding the use
of moneys transferred under Section
903, SSA. These provisions usually
mirror the requirements of Section
903(c)(2), SSA, pertaining to
‘‘traditional’’ Reed Act distributions,
including a provision that the moneys
be used for the payment of UC unless
appropriated by the legislative body of
the State for the administration of the
State’s UC law or the State’s system of
public employment offices.
The special administrative transfer is
not, however, available for the payment
of UC and its administrative uses are
more limited. As a result, if the State’s
UC law permits a broader use, the State
must either (1) amend its UC law to
reflect the more limited use of the
special administrative transfer, or (2)
interpret its UC law consistent with the
limited uses specified in Section 903(g),
SSA. States exploring the latter option
may be able to base their interpretation
on State UC law provisions that require
interpretations of State UC law in a
manner consistent with Federal law.
Attachment II to UIPL 39–97 contains
draft language for State Reed Act
provisions, which many States used to
create their permanent provisions. For
these States, we recommend the
following language be added:
(6) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), moneys
credited with respect to the special transfer
made under section 903(g), SSA, may be used
solely for the purposes specified in such
section and are not subject to appropriation
by the legislature. [Emphasis added.]
States should modify this language to
accord with State usage and to assure
correct State law citations. The
emphasized language is necessary only
if the State chooses to avoid the
appropriation process for the special
administrative transfer. As an
alternative to this approach, States may
also consider a broader amendment that
automatically authorizes the State law
to take into account any Federal law
limitations on use not contained in State
law.
IV–6. Question: My State has an
advance under Title XII, SSA, so that it
can continue to pay benefits. Does this
affect my administrative transfer?
Answer: No. Eligibility for the transfer
does not depend upon a State having no
outstanding advance. Therefore, the
entire amount of the special
administrative transfer for a State will
be transferred to the State’s account in
the UTF, notwithstanding any advance.
Attachment V
Suspensions
Interest on Advances and Federal
Taxation of UC
Interest Payments
V–1. Question: How did the
amendments made by Section 2004 of
Public Law 111–5 affect interest due on
Title XII advances?
Answer: Section 2004 added new
paragraph (10) to Section 1202(b), SSA.
Under this new paragraph, any interest
payment due during the period
beginning on the date of enactment (that
is beginning February 17, 2009) and
ending on December 31, 2010, shall be
‘‘deemed to have been’’ paid by the
State. This effectively waives all interest
due during this period. Further, no
interest accrues on any advance or
advances made to a State during this
period.
V–2. Question: Will interest accrue on
advances made prior to the date of
enactment?
Answer: Yes. Although interest will
accrue on such advances, any interest
due within the period beginning
February 17, 2009, and ending on
December 31, 2010 will, as discussed in
the previous Q&A, be waived. However,
interest accrued after September 30,
2010, will not be due within this period.
Instead, such accrued interest will be
due no later than September 30, 2011.
V–3. Question: How is interest after
December 31, 2010, determined?
Answer: The normal rules for
determining the amounts of interest
accrued and the dates interest is due
will again apply.
Partial Suspension of Federal Income
Tax
V–4. Question: How did the
amendments made by Public Law 111–
5 affect the taxation of unemployment
benefits?
Answer: For tax year 2009 only, the
first $2,400 paid in unemployment
benefits is not subject to Federal income
tax. Amounts above $2,400 remain
taxable.
V–5. Question: Will this suspension
require any operational changes by my
agency?
Answer: States are to continue to (1)
report UC payments on Form 1099 and
(2) withhold Federal income tax from
UC benefits when requested by the
individual. States are encouraged to
promptly update information provided
to individuals about the taxation of UC
so that individuals may make informed
decisions about whether to elect (or
continue) the withholding of Federal
income tax from UC.
Attachment VI
Text of Sections 2003 and 2004 of
Public Law 111–5
Text may be found at: https://
wdr.doleta.gov/directives/attach/UIPL/
UIPL14–09f.pdf.
Attachment VII
UC MODERNIZATION DISTRIBUTIONS—AMOUNTS
$500 M Admin
Distribution
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
State
AK ....................................................................................
AL .....................................................................................
AR ....................................................................................
AZ ....................................................................................
CA ....................................................................................
CO ....................................................................................
CT ....................................................................................
DC ....................................................................................
DE ....................................................................................
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Sep 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00092
$1,115,660
7,176,668
4,283,524
10,721,206
59,905,736
9,104,983
6,272,238
1,973,784
1,562,028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
$7.0 Billion
Distribution
$15,619,234
100,473,351
59,969,332
150,096,885
838,680,283
127,469,762
87,811,338
27,632,982
21,868,398
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
⁄ Share
13
$5,206,411
33,491,117
19,989,777
50,032,295
279,560,094
42,489,921
29,270,446
9,210,994
7,289,466
23SEN1
⁄ Share
23
$10,412,823
66,982,234
39,979,555
100,064,590
559,120,189
84,979,841
58,540,892
18,421,988
14,578,932
48610
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices
UC MODERNIZATION DISTRIBUTIONS—AMOUNTS—Continued
$500 M Admin
Distribution
State
$7.0 Billion
Distribution
⁄ Share
13
⁄ Share
23
FL .....................................................................................
GA ....................................................................................
HI .....................................................................................
IA ......................................................................................
ID .....................................................................................
IL ......................................................................................
IN .....................................................................................
KS ....................................................................................
KY ....................................................................................
LA .....................................................................................
MA ....................................................................................
MD ...................................................................................
ME ....................................................................................
MI .....................................................................................
MN ...................................................................................
MO ...................................................................................
MS ....................................................................................
MT ....................................................................................
NC ....................................................................................
ND ....................................................................................
NE ....................................................................................
NH ....................................................................................
NJ .....................................................................................
NM ...................................................................................
NV ....................................................................................
NY ....................................................................................
OH ....................................................................................
OK ....................................................................................
OR ....................................................................................
PA ....................................................................................
PR ....................................................................................
RI .....................................................................................
SC ....................................................................................
SD ....................................................................................
TN ....................................................................................
TX ....................................................................................
UT ....................................................................................
VA ....................................................................................
VI ......................................................................................
VT ....................................................................................
WA ...................................................................................
WI .....................................................................................
WV ...................................................................................
WY ...................................................................................
31,733,965
15,734,725
2,180,480
5,058,171
2,304,345
21,510,763
10,607,023
4,926,439
6,441,139
7,027,524
11,620,239
9,053,580
2,016,519
14,877,327
9,290,259
9,522,006
4,009,761
1,394,697
14,647,397
1,039,443
3,116,126
2,242,944
14,773,097
2,787,327
5,495,529
29,481,579
18,893,471
5,420,463
6,112,474
19,521,393
2,946,268
1,675,756
6,961,392
1,260,545
10,129,145
39,690,810
4,356,943
13,460,932
143,065
994,136
10,470,988
9,566,720
2,369,759
1,017,509
444,275,516
220,286,144
30,526,725
70,814,387
32,260,831
301,150,687
148,498,323
68,970,143
90,175,943
98,385,331
162,683,341
126,750,124
28,231,263
208,282,572
130,063,620
133,308,082
56,136,656
19,525,764
205,063,552
14,552,205
43,625,769
31,401,220
206,823,364
39,022,582
76,937,412
412,742,107
264,508,588
75,886,483
85,574,641
273,299,496
41,247,756
23,460,578
97,459,490
17,647,634
141,808,031
555,671,344
60,997,206
188,453,049
2,002,911
13,917,898
146,593,828
133,934,079
33,176,630
14,245,130
148,091,839
73,428,715
10,175,575
23,604,796
10,753,610
100,383,562
49,499,441
22,990,048
30,058,648
32,795,110
54,227,780
42,250,041
9,410,421
69,427,524
43,354,540
44,436,027
18,712,219
6,508,588
68,354,517
4,850,735
14,541,923
10,467,073
68,941,121
13,007,527
25,645,804
137,580,702
88,169,529
25,295,494
28,524,880
91,099,832
13,749,252
7,820,193
32,486,497
5,882,545
47,269,344
185,223,781
20,332,402
62,817,683
667,637
4,639,299
48,864,609
44,644,693
11,058,877
4,748,377
296,183,677
146,857,429
20,351,150
47,209,591
21,507,221
200,767,125
98,998,882
45,980,095
60,117,295
65,590,221
108,455,561
84,500,083
18,820,842
138,855,048
86,709,080
88,872,055
37,424,437
13,017,176
136,709,035
9,701,470
29,083,846
20,934,147
137,882,243
26,015,055
51,291,608
275,161,405
176,339,059
50,590,989
57,049,761
182,199,664
27,498,504
15,640,385
64,972,993
11,765,089
94,538,687
370,447,563
40,664,804
125,635,366
1,335,274
9,278,599
97,729,219
89,289,386
22,117,753
9,496,753
US .............................................................................
500,000,000
7,000,000,000
2,333,333,331
4,666,666,669
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
UIPL No. 14–09, Change 1—Special
Transfers for Unemployment
Compensation Modernization and
Administration and Relief From
Interest on Advances
1. Purpose. To provide additional
guidance to States concerning
unemployment compensation (UC)
modernization incentive payments, the
recent special administrative transfers,
and to correct guidance related to relief
from interest on advances to State
unemployment funds.
2. References. The Assistance for
Unemployed Workers and Struggling
Families Act, Title II of Division B of
Public Law 111–5, enacted February 17,
2009; the Social Security Act (SSA); the
Federal Unemployment Tax Act
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Sep 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
(FUTA); and Unemployment Insurance
Program Letter (UIPL) No. 14–09.
3. Background. UIPL No. 14–09
provided guidance to States on the UC
provisions of Public Law 111–5,
including how to qualify for UC
modernization payments. This UIPL,
using a Question and Answer (Q&A)
format, provides, among other things:
• Additional guidance concerning
applications for UC modernization
incentive payments and on using a
training benefit provision to qualify for
such payments.
• Additional guidance related to the
special administrative transfer.
• A correction to earlier guidance
related to relief from interest on
advances.
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4. Action. State administrators should
distribute this advisory to appropriate
staff.
5. Inquiries. Questions should be
addressed to your Regional Office.
6. Attachment. QUESTIONS AND
ANSWERS
Attachment
Questions and Answers
UC Modernization—Applications
Under ‘‘Permanent’’ Laws
CH 1–1. Question. UIPL No. 14–09
provides that applications for incentive
payments should only be made under
provisions of State laws that are
currently in effect as permanent law and
not subject to discontinuation. Does this
mean that my State may never repeal
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices
any of the provisions that qualified it for
a UC Modernization payment?
Answer: No. If a State eventually
decides to repeal or modify any of these
provisions, it may do so, and it will not
be required to return any incentive
payments. However, in providing the
incentive payments, Congress clearly
intended to support States that had
already adopted certain eligibility
provisions and to expand eligibility to
additional beneficiaries by encouraging
other States to adopt these provisions.
By specifying that the provisions must
be in effect as permanent law, Congress
also made clear its intention that the
benefit expansions not be transitory.
While States are free to change or repeal
the provisions on which modernization
payments were based subsequent to
receipt of incentive payments, Congress
and the Department rely on States’ good
faith in adopting the eligibility criteria,
and the application must attest to this
good faith as required by the following
Q&A.
CH 1–2. Question: Are there any
changes to the application procedure?
Answer: Yes. Each State’s application
for incentive payments must contain a
certification that the application is
submitted in good faith with the
intention of providing benefits to
unemployed workers who meet the
eligibility provisions on which the
application is based.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
UC Modernization—Training Benefits
CH 1–3. Question: May my State
establish a limitation on when the
individual must enroll in training to be
eligible for the training benefit?
Answer: Yes. As a general matter,
individuals who were separated from
declining occupations or businesses
reducing operations, and who would
benefit from job training, should be
placed in appropriate training as soon as
possible. A State law would qualify for
certification if it provided that an
individual must be enrolled in training
no later than the end of the benefit year
established with respect to the
separation that makes the individual
eligible for the training benefit. (That is,
a separation from a declining
occupation, or a separation due to a
permanent reduction of operations at
the individual’s place of employment.)
A State may provide for a longer period
of time, but its application would not be
certified if it provided for a period of
time ending prior to the end of the
individuals’ benefit year.
States adopting this limitation must
notify individuals of the limitation at
the time the State approves their initial
claims.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Sep 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
CH 1–4. Question: Q&A III–24 in UIPL
No. 14–09 provides that eligibility for
the training benefit may not be
terminated by the expiration of a benefit
year. Does this mean that my State may
set no outside limits on payment of the
training benefit?
Answer: No. Q&A III–24 was intended
to assure that an individual enrolled
and making satisfactory progress in
training did not have eligibility for the
training benefit terminated because the
benefit year ended. A State may,
however, terminate an individual’s
training benefit after the individual has
been provided a reasonable period to
collect the entire training benefit. A
State law would qualify for certification
if it provided that no training benefits
are payable one year following the end
of the benefit year. If a State adopts a
shorter termination date, its application
must justify why the date is reasonable.
CH 1–5. Question: An individual
voluntarily quit a job. May my law deny
this individual the training benefit?
Answer: The answer depends upon
the facts. Section 903(f)(3)(C)(ii), SSA,
as amended, provides that the training
benefit is payable to an individual who
was either ‘‘separated from a declining
occupation, or [was] involuntarily and
indefinitely separated from employment
as a result of a permanent reduction of
operations at the individual’s place of
employment. * * *’’ Since these two
conditions are in the disjunctive, a State
must pay the training benefit if a
claimant meets either one. Accordingly,
the State must pay the training benefit
to an individual who voluntarily quit a
job in a ‘‘declining occupation,’’ because
Federal law does not condition
eligibility on the cause of the separation
where the separation is from a declining
occupation. Further, the State must pay
the benefit where the individual was
‘‘involuntarily and indefinitely
separated from employment as a result
of a permanent reduction of operations
at the individual’s place of employment.
* * *’’ However, the State may deny
the benefit where neither condition is
met: an individual voluntarily quit a job
and the job was not in a declining
occupation.
Special Administrative Transfers
CH 1–6. Question: Section
903(g)(3)(C) of the SSA provides that my
State’s share of the $500 million special
administrative transfer is available for,
among other things, ‘‘improvement of
unemployment benefit and tax
operations, including responding to
increased demand for unemployment
compensation.’’ Does this mean that my
State may use this money to fund the
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48611
hiring of additional staff due to
increased workload?
Answer: Yes. Adding staff to respond
to workload is ‘‘responding to increased
demand for unemployment
compensation.’’
CH 1–7. Question: May my State use
its share of the $500 million special
administrative transfer to pay costs
individuals might otherwise incur in
using their UC debit cards?
Answer: Yes. Reducing costs to
individuals in accessing their UC
payments is an ‘‘improvement’’ in UC
benefit operations because it facilitates
the payment of benefits.
CH 1–8. Question: When was the $500
million special administrative
distribution transferred to States?
Answer: March 2, 2009.
Reporting
CH 1–9. Question: Where should
transactions involving UC
modernization incentive payments and
the $500 million special administrative
distribution be reported?
Answer: The transfer of any incentive
payments and the $500 million special
administrative funds was authorized by
Title IX of the SSA, as amended. As
such, transactions involving these funds
should be reported on the ETA 8403
Summary of Financial Transaction—
Title IX Funds as well as on lines 15 and
44 of the ETA 2112, UI Financial
Transaction Summary report. (OMB
Numbers 1205–0154 and 1205–0154.)
Interest on Title XII Advances
CH 1–10. Question: How did the
amendments made by Section 2004 of
Public Law 111–5 affect interest due on
Title XII advances?
Answer: Section 2004 added new
paragraph (10) to Section 1202(b), SSA:
(10)(A) With respect to the period
beginning on the date of enactment of this
paragraph and ending on December 31,
2010—
(i) any interest payment otherwise due
from a State under this subsection during
such period shall be deemed to have been
made by the State; and
(ii) no interest shall accrue during such
period on any advance or advances made
under section 1201 to a State.
(B) The provisions of subparagraph (A)
shall have no effect on the requirement for
interest payments under this subsection after
the period described in such subparagraph or
on the accrual of interest under this
subsection after such period. [Emphasis
added.]
Under this new paragraph, any interest
payment due during the period
beginning on the date of enactment (that
is, beginning February 17, 2009) and
ending on December 31, 2010, shall be
‘‘deemed to have been’’ paid by the
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
48612
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices
State. This effectively waives all interest
due during this period. Further, no
interest accrues on any advance or
advances during this period.
This Q&A supersedes Q&A V–1 of
UIPL 14–09 and corrects the text of the
amendment found on page 4 of
Attachment VI to UIPL 14–09.
CH 1–11. Question: Will interest
accrue on advances made prior to the
date of enactment during the period
February 17, 2009 through December 31,
2010?
Answer: No. As discussed in the
previous Q&A, no interest will accrue
on advances during the period. This
Q&A supersedes Q&A V–2 of UIPL No.
14–09.
CH 1–12. Question: How is interest
after December 31, 2010, determined?
Answer: The normal rules for
determining the amounts of interest
accrued and the dates interest is due
will again apply. This response is the
same as Q&A V–3 of UIPL No. 14–09.
Dated this 17th day of September, 2009.
Jane Oates,
Assistant Secretary of Labor, Employment
and Training Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–22917 Filed 9–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FW–P
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Dated: September 15, 2009.
Richard W. Sherman,
Deputy General Counsel.
[FR Doc. E9–22847 Filed 9–22–09; 8:45 am]
[Notice (09–080)]
Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive
License
BILLING CODE 7510–13–P
AGENCY: National Aeronautics and
Space Administration.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to grant
exclusive license.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Sep 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
[Notice (09–081)]
AGENCY: National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Notice of the retirement of one
Privacy Act system of records notice.
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
Privacy Act of 1974, NASA is giving
notice that it proposes to retire the
following Privacy Act system of records
notice, Kennedy Space Center Shuttle
Training Certification System (YC–04)/
KSC 76STCS (October 1, 2007, 72 FR
55832) from its inventory of record
systems and rely upon the Governmentwide system of records notice issued by
the Office of Personnel Management,
OPM/Govt-1 General Personnel Records
(June 19, 2006, 71 FR 35342), which is
written to cover all Federal government
training and certification records.
Frm 00095
Fmt 4703
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patti
F. Stockman, Privacy Act Officer, Office
of the Chief Information Officer,
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration Headquarters,
Washington, DC 20546–0001, (202) 358–
4787, NASA-PAOfficer@nasa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Pursuant to the provisions of the
Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, and
as part of ongoing integration and
management efforts, NASA is retiring
the system of records notice, Kennedy
Space Center Shuttle Training
Certification System (YC–04)/KSC
76STCS (October 1, 2007, 72 FR 55832).
NASA will continue to collect and
maintain records regarding individuals
who are trained and certified to safely
perform hazardous work and will rely
upon the existing Federal Governmentwide system of records notice titled
OPM/GOVT–1 General Personnel
Records (June 19, 2006, 71 FR 35342),
which is written to cover all Federal
training and certification record
systems. Eliminating this notice will
have no adverse impacts on individuals,
but will promote the overall
streamlining and management of NASA
Privacy Act record systems.
Bobby L. German,
Acting NASA Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. E9–22849 Filed 9–22–09; 8:45 am]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Sunshine Federal Register Notice
Privacy Act of 1974; Privacy Act
System of Records
PO 00000
DATES: These changes will take effect 30
calendar days from the date of this
publication.
BILLING CODE 7510–03–P
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
SPACE ADMINISTRATION
This notice is issued in
accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(c)(1) and
37 CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i). NASA hereby
gives notice of its intent to grant an
exclusive license worldwide to practice
the invention described and claimed in
U.S. patent 5,393,634, entitled
‘‘Continuous Phase and Amplitude
Holographic Elements’’ to Snapshot
Spectra, having its principal place of
business in Pasadena, California. The
patent rights in this invention have been
assigned to the United States of America
as represented by the Administrator of
the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration. The prospective
exclusive license will comply with the
terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C 209
and 37 CFR 404.7.
DATES: The prospective exclusive
license may be granted unless, within
fifteen (15) days from the date of this
published notice, NASA receives
SUMMARY:
written objections including evidence
and argument that establish that the
grant of the license would not be
consistent with the requirements of 35
U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7.
Competing applications completed and
received by NASA within fifteen (15)
days of the date of this published notice
will also be treated as objections to the
grant of the contemplated exclusive
license. Objections submitted in
response to this notice will not be made
available to the public for inspection
and, to the extent permitted by law, will
not be released under the Freedom of
Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.
ADDRESSES: Objections relating to the
prospective exclusive license may be
submitted to Patent Counsel, NASA
Management Office, Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, Mail Code 180–200, 4800
Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, CA 91109;
or via facsimile at (818) 393–3160.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark Homer, Patent Counsel, NASA
Management Office, Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, Mail Code 180–200, 4800
Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, CA 91109;
(818) 354–7770; (818) 393–3160
[facsimile]. Information about other
NASA inventions available for licensing
can be found online at https://
technology.nasa.gov/.
Sfmt 4703
AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETINGS: Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
DATES: Weeks of September 21, 28,
October 5, 12, 19, 26, 2009.
PLACE: Commissioners’ Conference
Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland.
STATUS: Public and Closed.
Week of September 21, 2009
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
9:25 a.m.
Affirmation Session (Public Meeting)
(Tentative).
a. Final Rule Establishing Criminal
Penalties for the Unauthorized
Introduction of Weapons into
Facilities Designated by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
(Tentative).
b. Final Rule Related to Alternate
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 183 (Wednesday, September 23, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48602-48612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-22917]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
Special Transfers for Unemployment Compensation Modernization and
Administration and Relief From Interest on Advances
AGENCY: Employment and Training Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Employment and Training Administration has provided
guidance to State workforce agencies to assist them in qualifying for
the incentive payments to modernize their State unemployment
compensation (UC) law as well as to clarify the special transfer of
funds, the suspension of interest on Federal loan advances and Federal
tax on UC authorized by Public Law 111-5. The original guidance was
issued as Unemployment Insurance Program Letter (UIPL) No. 14-09 on
February 26, 2009 (available at: https://wdr.doleta.gov/directives/attach/UIPL/UIPL14-09.pdf). Additional guidance was issued on March 19,
2009 as UIPL 14-09, Change 1 (available at: https://wdr.doleta.gov/directives/attach/UIPL/UIPL14-09c1.pdf). Both UIPLs are published below
to inform the public. There are no rescissions on this continuing
guidance.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
UIPL No. 14-09--Special Transfers for Unemployment Compensation
Modernization and Administration and Relief From Interest on Advances
1. Purpose. To advise States of amendments to Federal law providing
for unemployment compensation (UC) modernization incentive payments to
States, a special administrative transfer to States, relief from
interest on advances to State unemployment funds, and the partial
suspension of Federal income tax on UC.
2. References. The Assistance for Unemployed Workers and Struggling
Families Act, Title II of Division B of Public Law No. 111-5, enacted
February 17, 2009; Section 1007 of Public Law 111-5; the Social
Security Act (SSA); the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA);
Unemployment Insurance Program Letter (UIPL) No. 39-97; and Training
and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) No. 18-01.
3. Background. Public Law 111-5 made the following changes
affecting the UC program:
Extended the Emergency UC program, commonly known as
EUC08.
Created a new federally-funded program which temporarily
increases UC benefits by $25 a week.
Temporarily modified provisions in the permanent Federal-
State extended benefits program.
Provided for two special distributions from the
Unemployment Trust Fund (UTF) to the States.
For States receiving advances to pay benefits under Title
XII, SSA, waived interest due on these advances for a specified period.
Suspended the Federal income tax on the first $2,400 paid
in UC for tax year 2009.
The first three items are addressed in separate UIPLs. This UIPL
addresses the special distributions, the provisions affecting Title XII
loans, and the taxation of UC benefits.
[[Page 48603]]
In general, the first special distribution relates to UC
``modernization incentive payments.'' The total amount available for
all States is $7 billion. To obtain its share, the State must make an
application to the Department of Labor demonstrating that its UC law
contains certain benefit eligibility provisions. Attachment I discusses
eligibility for these incentive payments and the application and
approval process. Attachments II and III discuss these matters in
greater detail. The last date on which an incentive distribution may be
made is September 30, 2011, so applications must be received no later
than August 22, 2011.
The second distribution is a ``special transfer'' of $500 million
to the States' accounts in the UTF to be used for certain
administrative purposes. This administrative transfer is made
regardless of whether the State qualifies for a modernization incentive
payment. States do not need to apply to receive these amounts.
Attachment IV discusses this administrative transfer and the
permissible uses of the amounts transferred. Attachment VII contains
the amounts distributed under this administrative transfer and each
State's potential share under the modernization incentive payments.
Attachment V discusses the provisions related to suspension of
interest on advances and the partial suspension of Federal income tax
on UC. Attachment VI sets forth the text of the amendments discussed in
this UIPL.
4. Action. State administrators should distribute this advisory to
appropriate staff.
5. Inquiries. Questions should be addressed to your Regional
Office.
6. Attachments.
Attachment I--Modernization Incentive Payments--Overview
Attachment II--Modernization Incentive Payments--Base Period
Provision--Questions and Answers
Attachment III--Modernization Incentive Payments--Other Eligibility
Provisions--Questions and Answers
Attachment IV--Special Administrative Transfers--Questions and
Answers
Attachment V--Suspensions--Interest on Advances and Federal Taxation
of UC
Attachment VI--Text of Sections 2003 and 2004 of Public Law 111-5
Attachment VII--UC Modernization Distributions--Amount
Attachment I
Modernization Incentive Payments--Overview
In General
Section 2003(a) of Public Law 111-5 added new subsection (f) to
Section 903, SSA, to provide for incentive payments to States.
These incentive payments are calculated in the same manner as a
``Reed Act'' distribution. This means each State's share is based on
its proportionate share of FUTA taxable wages multiplied by the $7
billion authorized by the amendments. For purposes of computing each
State's proportionate share, the Secretary of Labor will use the
taxable wages that would have been used for calculating any Reed Act
distribution occurring on October 1, 2008. As provided by Section
903(f)(1)(B), SSA, tax year 2007 data is used for determining each
State's share.
A State's share will be reserved in the Federal Unemployment
Account (FUA) in the UTF for purposes of making incentive payments. As
of the close of Federal fiscal year 2011 (that is, September 30, 2011),
this limitation expires, and any unused amounts again become available
for any FUA use.
A State's eligibility for its maximum incentive payment is
conditioned on its law containing specific provisions:
To obtain the first one-third of its share, the State law
must provide for either a base period that uses recent wages or an
alternative base period (ABP) using recent wages. This ``base period
provision'' is discussed in Attachment II.
If a State qualifies under this base period provision, it
may obtain the remaining two-thirds if its State law contains two of
four options related to benefit eligibility. These options are
discussed in Attachment III.
State Applications
In General. The State must apply to the Department of Labor to
receive any incentive payment. A complete application must document
which provisions of State law meet the requirements for obtaining an
incentive payment as interpreted by this UIPL. The application must
also describe how the State intends to use any incentive payment to
improve or strengthen the State's UC program. Attachment II discusses
what constitutes a complete application for purposes of the base period
provision and Attachment III discusses what constitutes a complete
application for purposes of the other benefit eligibility provisions.
Applications are to be signed by the State agency administrator and
addressed to: Cheryl Atkinson, Administrator, Office of Workforce
Security, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room S-4231, Washington, DC
20210.
States may submit applications by mail, fax, or e-mail. States may
fax applications to 202-693-2874 to the attention of the Division of UC
Legislation. E-mail submissions should be sent to
Atkinson.Cheryl@dol.gov with a cc to Hildebrand.Gerard@dol.gov. Copies
should be provided to the appropriate Regional Office. For purposes of
determining the date of receipt (as described immediately below), the
date of receipt in the National Office will be used.
Review Process. Within 30 days of receipt by the Department of a
State's complete application, the State will be notified whether it
qualifies for an incentive payment. If it does, the Secretary of
Treasury will transfer the amount of the incentive payment within seven
days of receipt of the Department's certification. Since all incentive
payments must be made before October 1, 2011, and since the Department
must have adequate time to review any application, all applications
must be received by the Department no later than August 22, 2011.
To expedite processing of applications and distribution of
incentive payments to the States, the Department is providing for a
two-tiered application process under which a State may make one
application regarding the base period provisions and a separate
application regarding the other benefit eligibility provisions. Nothing
prohibits States from making a single application. However, since the
Department anticipates relatively swift action on base period
applications, it may be advantageous for States to make two
applications.
State Law Status. Applications should only be made under provisions
of State laws that are currently in effect as permanent law and not
subject to discontinuation. This means that the provision is not
subject to any condition--such as an expiration date, the balance in
the State's unemployment fund, or a legislative appropriation--that
might prevent the provision from becoming effective, or that might
suspend, discontinue, or nullify it.
There is one exception to this limitation. In some cases, a State
might enact a new provision of law to qualify for the incentive
payment, but delay its effective date due to implementation
requirements. In these cases, if the State law provision takes effect
within 12 months of the date of the Secretary of Labor's certification,
then the provision will be considered to be in effect as of the date of
the Secretary's certification to the Secretary of Treasury. In the case
of a provision that is not effective until more than 12 months (which
may be the case with ABP provisions) the State
[[Page 48604]]
should time its application so that the Secretary's certification will
be made no more than 12 months prior to its law's effective date. Thus,
for example, since the Secretary must rule on any application within 30
days, the application should be submitted no more than 13 months before
the State law's effective date. Note, however, as discussed above, the
Department will not consider applications received after August 22,
2011. As a result, the latest effective date of a provision must be on
or before September 21, 2012.
Receipt and Use of Incentive Payments
Following the Secretary's certification for an incentive payment,
the entire amount certified will be transferred to the State's account
in the UTF. A State may use its incentive payment: (1) To pay UC
(including dependents' allowances); or (2) upon appropriation of its
State legislature, to pay UC and employment service administrative
costs. The conditions for administrative use of the incentive payment
are the same as those applicable to the $8 billion Reed Act
distribution made in 2002. Refer to Q&As 9 through 19 and Q&A 21 in
Attachment I to TEGL 18-01 for guidance. Like the $8 billion Reed Act
distribution, there is no time limit on the use of the incentive
payment for benefit or administrative purposes. Incentive payments
available for the payment of UC must, however, be expended before the
State may obtain an advance to pay UC under Title XII, SSA.
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) Statement
The public reporting burden for this collection of information is
estimated to average approximately eight hours per response including
time for gathering and maintaining the data needed to complete the
required disclosure.
This UIPL contains a new collection of information in the form of
an application for UC Modernization Incentive Payments. According to
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13), no persons are
required to respond to a collection of information unless such
collection displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
control number. The Department is planning to submit an Information
Collection Request (ICR) to OMB requesting a new OMB Control Number.
The Department notes that a Federal agency cannot conduct or sponsor a
collection of information unless it is approved by OMB under the PRA,
and displays a currently valid OMB control number, and the public is
not required to respond to a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. See 44 U.S.C. 3507.
Also, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall be
subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of
information if the collection of information does not display a
currently valid OMB control number. See 44 U.S.C. 3512. The Department
will notify States of OMB's decision upon review of the Department's
ICR, including any changes that may result from this review process.
Attachment II
Modernization Incentive Payments
Base Period Provisions
Questions and Answers
II-1. Question. What provisions must my law contain to qualify for
an incentive payment under the base period provision?
Answer. There are two options:
A regular base period that includes the most recently
completed calendar quarter before the start of the benefit year, or
An ABP that includes the most recently completed calendar
quarter, when the claimant cannot meet monetary qualifying requirements
using a ``regular'' base period that excludes this quarter.
II-2. Question: I believe my State law qualifies for the incentive
payment. What should my application State?
Answer: The application must:
Identify the State;
Cite the specific base period provision of State law
supporting the application;
Certify that the provision of State law is either
currently in effect or will become effective for claims filed on or
after a specified date;
Contain a certification that the provision is permanent
(that is, not temporary) and is not subject to discontinuation under
any circumstances other than repeal by the legislature;
Address how the State intends to use the incentive payment
to improve or strengthen its UC program; and
Attach the relevant provision of State law.
II-3. Question: Is the Department aware of any existing ABP
provisions that will not qualify for the incentive payment?
Answer: Yes. A provision providing that an ABP will be used only if
the unemployment fund is above a certain ``solvency'' threshold would
not qualify because the ABP is subject to discontinuation under a
specified condition. Also, a State law that permits use of an ABP only
after a specified number of days have elapsed since the end of the last
completed quarter in order for wage records to be received would not
qualify because it does not permit use of the ABP during the days
immediately following the end of the quarter.
Attachment III
Modernization Incentive Payments
Other Eligibility Provision
Questions and Answers
In General
III-1. Question: If my State qualifies for the one-third incentive
payment related to its base period provision, what provisions must my
law contain to qualify for certification for the remaining two-thirds
of its incentive payment?
Answer: In brief, a State law must contain provisions carrying out
at least two of the following:
UC is payable to certain individuals seeking only part-
time work.
An individual is not disqualified from UC for separations
due to certain compelling family reasons.
An additional 26 weeks of UC is paid to exhaustees who are
enrolled in and making satisfactory progress in certain training
programs.
Dependents' allowances of at least $15 per dependent per
week, subject to a minimum aggregation, are paid to eligible
beneficiaries.
Part-Time Workers
III-2. Question: What is the part-time work option?
Answer: State law must provide that an individual will not be
denied UC under any provision relating to availability for work, active
search for work, or refusal to accept work, solely because such
individual is seeking only part-time work as defined by the Secretary
of Labor.
The State law may, however, deny benefits if a majority of the
weeks of work in the individual's base period do not include part-time
work. States are not required to have this exception in their laws in
order to qualify for the incentive payment under this option. In fact,
a State may determine that an individual who has previously worked full
time may be eligible for UC even if the individual limits him/herself
to seeking part-time work.
III-3. Question: For purposes of ``seeking only part-time work,''
how does the Department define ``seeking only part-time work''?
Answer: For purposes of the incentive payment, the Department
defines
[[Page 48605]]
``seeking only part-time work'' as work meeting any one of the
following situations:
Situations where the individual is willing to work at
least 20 hours per week.
Situations where the individual is available for a number
of hours per week that are comparable to the individual's part-time
work experience in the base period. For example, if the individual
worked 16 hours per week in the base period, the State may require the
individual to seek jobs offering at least 16 hours of work. If the
individual worked 32 hours per week, the State may require the
individual to seek jobs offering at least 32 hours of work.
Situations where the individual is available for hours
that are comparable to the individual's work at the time of the most
recent separation from employment. This is similar to the preceding
definition except that it allows the State to take into account periods
between the end of the base period and the filing of the first claim
for UC.
The Department will approve a State's application if the State uses
any one of the above definitions. The State may also use a combination
of these definitions. For example, a State may define part-time work as
work having comparable hours to the individual's work in the base
period, except that an individual must be available for at least 20
hours of work per week.
A State may also have a broader definition of part-time work. For
example, the State may require the individual to be available for only
10 or more hours per week. Of course, the State may not allow the
individual to limit his or her availability to the extent that it
constitutes a withdrawal from the labor market. (See 20 CFR
604.5(a)(1).)
III-4. Question: My State law provides for payment to individuals
seeking part-time work only if they have worked part-time during the
entire base period. Would an application containing this limitation be
certified?
Answer: No. To qualify for the incentive payment, a State law must
permit an individual to seek part-time work, except that the State may
deny benefits if a majority of weeks of work in the base period do not
include part-time work (i.e., were full-time). Requiring part-time work
throughout the entire base period is more restrictive than the
``majority'' standard and would not qualify.
III-5. Question: My State law provides for payment to individuals
seeking part-time work only if my agency determines the individual has
a legitimate reason to limit employment to part-time work. Would an
application containing this limitation be certified?
Answer: No. To qualify for the incentive payment, a State law must
permit an individual to seek part-time work, except that the State may
deny benefits if a majority of weeks of work in the base period do not
include part-time work (i.e., were full-time). Requiring agency
approval is more restrictive.
III-6. Question: My State law provides for payment to individuals
who have a history of part-time work. Would an application containing
this limitation be certified?
Answer: It depends on how the State interprets and applies this
provision. To obtain certification, the State's application must
demonstrate that, at a minimum, all individuals who work the majority
of weeks in the base period in part-time employment will not be
determined ineligible because they are seeking only part-time work.
III-7. Question: My State will use the option that permits us to
examine whether the majority of weeks of work in the individual's base
period are in part-time work. If the individual worked 40 weeks in the
base period and 21 weeks are part-time, must my State's law provide
that this individual may limit his/her availability to only part-time
work?
Answer: Yes, the State's law must provide that the individual may
limit his/her availability to only part-time work under the facts as
stated. Since the individual has worked the majority of weeks in the
base period in part-time work, this individual must be allowed to seek
only part-time work, as defined by the Department. For purposes of this
option, a ``week of work'' is a calendar week.
III-8. Question: My State law requires an individual to be
available for the same schedule of work as previously worked. For
example, if the individual worked (either part-time or full-time)
during specific hours Monday through Friday, the individual will be
denied if he or she is not available for the same schedule on these
calendar days. Will my State's application be certified if it contains
this provision?
Answer: Yes. The Federal requirement is that an individual not be
denied ``solely because the individual is seeking only part-time
work.'' In this case, the State is placing another, additional test of
availability on all individuals seeking work, regardless of whether the
work is full-time (as defined under State law) or part-time (as defined
consistent with Q&A III-3).
In cases where a test applies only to part-time workers, the
Department will evaluate the test to determine if it is consistent with
the definition of ``seeking suitable part-time work'' contained in this
UIPL. For example, if a State required that only individuals seeking
part-time work be available for the same work schedule, the State's
application would be denied since this UIPL does not interpret
``suitable part-time work'' to include such a requirement. If a State
test, although worded in a way that is applicable to both full-time and
part-time workers, is in fact applicable only to part-time workers, it
will be reviewed as described in this paragraph.
Quits Due to Compelling Family Reasons
III-9. Question: For purposes of qualifying for the incentive
payment, what are ``compelling family reasons?''
Answer: To qualify for the incentive payment using the ``compelling
family reason'' option, the State law must provide that an individual
will not be disqualified for separating from work under any and all of
the following circumstances:
Domestic violence (verified by reasonable and confidential
documentation as the State law may require) which causes the individual
reasonably to believe that the individual's continued employment would
jeopardize the safety of the individual or of any member of the
individual's immediate family (as defined by the U.S. Department of
Labor (Department)).
The illness or disability of a member of the individual's
immediate family (as these terms are defined by the Department).
The need for the individual to accompany his/her spouse:
(1) To a place from which it is impractical for such individual to
commute; and (2) due to a change in location of the spouse's
employment.
III-10. Question: An employer discharges an individual for chronic
absenteeism that constitutes misconduct under my State's law. Only
after the separation does the individual indicate that the absences
were to care for a member of his/her immediate family. Would my State's
application be denied if individuals in this situation were
disqualified under a misconduct separation?
Answer: No. The Federal law provides that an ``individual shall not
be disqualified from [UC] for separating from employment'' for
compelling family reasons. In some cases, such as when the individual
fails to advise the employer of an absence, the basis for the
separation may go beyond ``compelling
[[Page 48606]]
family reasons.'' That is, misconduct may exist despite the existence
of what otherwise would be compelling family reasons, and the State may
deny the individual under its misconduct provisions.
To be certified, a State law must reasonably define misconduct. The
fact that the employer initiated the discharge does not mean misconduct
exists. For example, an individual who is hospitalized as a result of
domestic violence may be unable to contact the employer. If the
individual is discharged in such cases, the State law, to be certified,
must consider the individual to have separated from work due to
compelling family reasons. Similarly, if the employer discharges an
individual who has informed the employer of expected absences to care
for an ill child, the State law must consider the individual to have
been separated from work due to compelling family reasons.
Many State misconduct provisions have been interpreted to require a
willful and wanton disregard of the employer's interest. The Department
anticipates that these State law provisions are generally expected to
meet the conditions pertaining to compelling family reasons since
separations for compelling family reasons do not in themselves
constitute a willful and wanton disregard of the employer's interest.
However, to assure the State's law does not provide for a denial due to
misconduct for such separations, the State's application will need to
address the application of its misconduct provisions to compelling
family reasons.
III-11. Question: For purposes of the domestic violence provision,
what is meant by ``verified by such reasonable and confidential
documentation as the State law may require?''
Answer: As in other UC adjudications, the State must gather
sufficient facts to support any eligibility determination, which may
include verification of the individual's belief that his/her continued
employment would jeopardize the safety of the individual or a member of
the immediate family. When the State verifies the individual's belief,
the Department has determined the State may reasonably require a
statement supporting recent domestic violence from a qualified
professional from whom the individual has sought assistance such as a
counselor, shelter worker, member of the clergy, attorney, or health
worker.
The State must accept any other kind of evidence that reasonably
proves domestic violence. The State may accept, but may not require, as
evidence (1) an active or recently issued protective or other order
documenting domestic violence, or (2) a police record documenting
recent domestic violence as doing so will create an unreasonable bar to
benefits.
If the State obtains one instance of information that adequately
verifies the individual's belief, it would defeat the purpose of the
new Federal provisions for the State to burden the individual by
requiring additional information. Therefore, any application that
indicates that multiple verifications are necessary will not be
certified.
At a minimum, for purposes of holding information about domestic
violence confidential, the Department's regulations at 20 CFR Part 603
addressing the confidentiality of UC information will apply, as it does
to all confidential UC information. Given the sensitivity of the kind
of information that may be needed to prove domestic violence, as well
as the confidential sources from which it may have to be obtained, the
Department views the language about ``confidential information'' as an
authorization to seek information which may come from confidential
sources and as a reminder that such information must be kept
confidential.
III-12. Question: For purposes of the domestic violence and
illness/disability options, what is meant by ``immediate family
member?''
Answer: At a minimum, a State must include spouses, parents and
minor children under the age of 18 in its definition of ``immediate
family member'' for its provision to qualify for certification. States
may provide for a more inclusive definition (for example, including
grandparents, sisters, brothers, domestic partners, adult children or
foster children), but they are not required to do so for their
provisions to be certified.
III-13. Question: For purposes of the illness/disability option,
what is meant by ``illness'' and ``disability?''
Answer: ``Illness'' means a verified illness which necessitates the
care of the ill person for a period of time longer than the employer is
willing to grant leave (paid or otherwise). Similarly, ``disability''
means a verified disability which necessitates the care of the disabled
person for a period of time longer than the employer is willing to
grant leave (paid or otherwise) for. ``Disability'' encompasses all
types of disability, including (1) mental and physical disability; (2)
permanent and temporary disabilities; and (3) partial and total
disabilities. What is key is that the individual's illness or
disability necessitates care by another individual and the employer
does not accommodate the employee's request for time-off.
This is a minimum standard for a State to receive its incentive
payment. States may have broader eligibility provisions. However, a
State law provision would not be certified if it has a narrower
definition of illness or disability or provides for overly restrictive
limits on the types of verification of illness. For example, if the
State requires a medical doctor to verify an illness or disability when
other sources of verification are available, the application would not
be accepted. As another example, if a State law's provisions only apply
when the family member is terminally ill, the provision will not be
certified.
III-14. Question: My State law pertaining to separations to care
for family members is limited to cases where no reasonable, alternative
care was available. Would this provision be certified?
Answer: No. The new Federal provisions broadly require, as a
condition of certification, that the State law not disqualify an
individual separating because of the ``illness or disability of a
family member. * * *'' The Act does not permit a State to limit
eligibility to particular circumstances surrounding a separation for
this reason. Thus, a provision would not be certified if it applies
only when no reasonable, alternative care is available.
III-15. Question: For purposes of quitting to accompany a spouse to
a new location from which it is impractical to commute, what is meant
by ``impractical?''
Answer: What is ``impractical'' will be based on commuting patterns
in the locality. States should assure that their provisions reasonably
reflect these commuting patterns.
III-16. Question: My State looks at whether it is impractical for
the individual to commute from the new location. We do not examine the
reason why the spouse relocated. Would this provision qualify for an
incentive payment?
Answer: In this case, the State permits payment of UC in all
situations required for the State to qualify for an incentive payment.
State law may provide for broader eligibility than required for
certification, such as where it is not practical to commute from the
new location.
III-17. Question: Do the provisions on compelling family reasons
affect my State's availability requirements as a condition of claimant
eligibility?
Answer: There is no effect. States must continue to require, at a
minimum,
[[Page 48607]]
that individuals be able to and available for work as defined by the
Department's regulations at 20 CFR part 604. The new Federal provisions
on compelling family reasons relate only to whether the reason for
quitting work is disqualifying, and do not address issues related to
the individual's continuing unemployment. Thus, for example, an
individual who quits employment for a compelling family reason may not
be disqualified for quitting, but the individual will be ineligible if
unavailable for work.
Training Benefits
III-18. Question: If a State elects the training benefit option,
under what conditions must it be payable?
Answer: The State law must provide that a training benefit be
payable to any individual who is unemployed (as determined under State
law, including partial and part-total unemployment), has exhausted all
rights to regular UC, and is enrolled in and making satisfactory
progress in either:
A State-approved training program, or
A job training program authorized under the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998 (WIA).
The State law must provide for payment of the training benefit to
individuals who are enrolled in and making satisfactory progress in
both of the above types of programs. However, the State law is not
required to provide for payment of the training benefit to an
individual who is receiving ``similar stipends'' or other training
allowances which can be used for non-training costs. (In addition, the
State may treat such stipends as disqualifying income.) In this case,
``similar stipend'' means an amount provided under a program with
similar aims, such as providing training to increase employability, and
in approximately the same amounts.
WIA or other approved job training programs for which training
benefits are paid may be limited to those that prepare an individual
for entry into a high-demand occupation if the individual has been:
Separated from a declining occupation, or
Involuntarily and indefinitely separated from employment
as a result of a permanent reduction of operations at the individual's
place of employment.
The requirements related to the job training program are minimum
requirements for purposes of certification. If the State pays training
benefits to a broader class of individuals participating in training
than specified above, the State will meet the requirements for this
option. For example, a State law may pay additional training benefits
to any individual who is preparing for a job in a ``demand occupation''
as opposed to a ``high-demand occupation.'' However, a State law would
not qualify for certification if it limits training benefits to a
narrower class of individuals. For example, if the training benefits
are payable only to individuals in job training programs leading to
high-wage occupations, the State law would not be certified because the
Federal provision does not authorize a high-wage restriction.
Whether an occupation is ``declining'' or ``high-demand'' will be
determined by the State using available labor market information data.
III-19. Question: How must the amount of training benefits be
determined for purposes of this option?
Answer: The amount of UC payable for a week of unemployment must,
at a minimum, equal the individual's weekly benefit amount (including
dependents' allowances) for the most recent benefit year less any
deductible income as determined under State law. The total amount of UC
payable to any individual must equal at least 26 times the individual's
average weekly benefit amount (including dependents' allowances) for
the most recent benefit year.
III-20. Question: What is meant by ``State-approved training
program''?
Answer: A program that the State determines is reasonably expected
to lead to employment in an occupation, including high-demand
occupations.
III-21. Question: What evidence may my State require for purposes
of determining whether an individual is making satisfactory progress in
the training program?
Answer: The State may require reasonable evidence of satisfactory
progress, such as reports from training providers and evidence of
attending training when attendance is a necessary part of such
training.
III-22. Question: My State has a training benefit provision, but
amounts must be appropriated each year by the legislature. Will this
provision qualify for the incentive payment?
Answer: No. To qualify for an incentive distribution, the State law
provision may not be subject to discontinuation. A provision subject to
appropriation may be capped with the result that it could be
discontinued within the State's fiscal year for which the appropriation
is made. Further, there is no guarantee any appropriation will be made
for future years.
III-23. Question: May the training benefit be paid after federally-
funded extensions of UC?
Answer: Yes. The training benefit may be paid after the individual
exhausts eligibility under the current Emergency Unemployment
Compensation program or under the permanent Federal-State Extended
Benefits program.
III-24. Question: May eligibility for the training benefit be
terminated by the expiration of a benefit year, or may it be limited to
individuals who have not previously received it?
Answer: No. Federal law does not contain these limitations.
Dependents' Allowances
III-25. Question: What is meant by ``dependent'' for purposes of
qualifying for an incentive payment under the option related to
dependents' allowances, as well as in other provisions relating to
incentive payments?
Answer: The term ``dependent'' is defined under State law for all
of these purposes.
III-26. Question: With respect to the dependents' allowances
option, what dollar amounts must be paid as dependents' allowances to
qualify for the incentive payment?
Answer: The State must pay an amount equaling at least $15 per
dependent per week. However, the State may cap the total allowance paid
to an individual for dependents at $50 per week of unemployment or 50
percent of the individual's weekly benefit amount for the benefit year,
whichever is less.
The State is not, however, required to pay the full dependents'
allowance when the individual has earnings for the week. Instead, the
State may provide for a reasonable reduction in the amount of any such
allowance for such week. A State law will qualify for certification
under this ``reasonableness'' test if it provides for the same pro rata
reduction in the dependents' allowance as was applied to the weekly
benefit amount. For example, if the individual is eligible for one-half
of the weekly benefit amount, the State may reduce the dependents'
allowance by one-half. If a State applies another reduction test that
it believes is reasonable, the State's application must explain why the
test is reasonable.
III-27. Question: My State does not pay a dependents' allowance if
the individual qualifies for the maximum weekly benefit amount. Would
my State's dependents' allowances provision qualify?
Answer: No. The new Federal provisions require, as a condition of
certification, that a State pay dependents' allowances, but permits
some limitation on their aggregation. Because this State provision
places an
[[Page 48608]]
additional limitation on dependents' allowances, the Department would
not certify it. Similarly, the Department would not certify a State
provision that does not pay dependents' allowances to individuals who
qualify for the minimum weekly benefit amount.
Regular Compensation
III-28. Question: The options relating to part-time work,
compelling family reasons, and dependents' allowances specify that they
must be applied to ``regular compensation.'' Does this mean they are
not required to be applied to other payments of UC?
Answer: For UC programs where benefits are funded by the Federal
government, Federal ``equal treatment'' requirements apply. Therefore,
except where the laws and regulations governing these programs provide
otherwise, benefits for the following UC programs must be paid in the
same amount, on the same terms, and under the same conditions as
regular compensation:
The permanent Federal-State Extended Benefits program.
The UC programs for former Federal employees and ex-
military personnel. Moreover, these programs are also included in the
definition of ``regular compensation'' in Section 205(2) of the
Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970, as
amended.
The current emergency UC program, commonly called the
EUC08 program.
The Disaster Unemployment Assistance program.
Trade Readjustment Allowances payable under the Trade Act,
as amended.
However, unless a State's law contains an ``equal treatment''
requirement for ``additional compensation,'' it need not apply the
requirements relating to part-time work, compelling family reasons and,
with one possible exception for the training benefit (explained in the
next paragraph), dependents' allowances in the payment of additional
compensation. Additional compensation is not regular compensation, but,
rather, compensation totally financed by a State and payable under
State law by reason of high unemployment or other special factors.
Thus, the limitation to ``regular compensation'' means, for example,
that for a State's provision relating to part-time workers to be
certified, the State law need not pay additional compensation to part-
time workers.
Note that benefits under the training benefits option are a form of
additional compensation. However, as discussed above for the training
benefits option, the State must include dependents' allowances in
calculating the individual's weekly benefit amount for the training
benefit. Those dependents' allowances must be calculated for the
training benefit in the same manner as they are calculated for regular
compensation. Thus, if a State selects its dependents' allowances
provision for certification, it must apply it to the training benefit.
Applications for Incentive Payments
III-29. Question: I believe my State law qualifies for an incentive
payment under two or more of the above options. What should my
application State?
Answer: For each option under which the State is applying, the
application must:
Name the State;
Cite to and attach the specific provisions of State law
supporting the application;
Certify that the provision of State law is either
currently in effect or will become effective for claims filed after a
specified date;
Contain a certification that the provision is permanent
(that is, not temporary) and is not subject to discontinuation under
any circumstances other than repeal by the legislature; and
Address how the State intends to use the incentive payment
to improve or strengthen its UC program.
The following additional information is also required:
When an application is based on an interpretation of State
law rather than explicit statutory language (as may be the case under
the options for part-time workers and compelling family reasons), the
State must provide evidence of its interpretation. This evidence may
include regulations, court cases, precedent decisions, or
administrative procedures. An application that merely asserts a
provision of State law is interpreted in a certain way will be deemed
incomplete and denied. Similarly, an application that cites to a court
case as an authoritative interpretation will be deemed incomplete and
denied unless the State provides regulations or procedures
demonstrating the court case has been implemented. The application must
describe these authorities and attach copies of any relevant material.
For an application pertaining to compelling family
reasons, the State must (1) explain its requirements for verification
of domestic violence and why they are reasonable, and (2) describe how
the State's misconduct provisions are consistent with Q&A III-10. The
application must attach copies of any relevant material supporting the
application's statements.
For an application that provides for a ``reasonable
reduction'' in dependents' allowances for weeks with earnings, describe
the reduction and why it is believed to be reasonable.
III-30. Question: My State has submitted an application under the
base period provision for the first one-third of its incentive payment.
Should we wait until that application is approved prior to submitting
an application for the remaining two-thirds?
Answer: No. It is not necessary to wait for approval of the base
period application. However, the Department will not certify the State
for the remaining two-thirds until it certifies the base period
provision.
Attachment IV
Special Administrative Transfers
Questions and Answers
IV-1. Question: How was Federal law amended to authorize the
special administrative transfer?
Answer: Section 2003(a) of Public Law 111-5 added a new subsection
(g) to Section 903, SSA, to make a special administrative transfer to
all States totaling $500,000,000 within 30 days of the date of
enactment, which was February 17, 2009. A State need take no action to
receive its share of the distribution.
IV-2. Question: How is my State's share of the special
administrative transfer determined?
Answer: It is calculated in the same manner as a ``Reed Act''
distribution. This means each State's share is based on its
proportionate share of FUTA taxable wages multiplied by the
$500,000,000 authorized by the amendments. For purposes of computing
each State's proportionate share, the Secretary of Labor will use the
taxable wages that would have been used for calculating any Reed Act
distribution occurring on October 1, 2008. As provided by the SSA, data
for tax year 2007 is used for determining each State's share.
IV-3. Question: What are the permissible uses of the administrative
transfer?
Answer: The administrative transfer may be used only for--
Implementing and administering the provisions of State law
that qualify the State for the incentive payments;
Improved outreach to individuals who might be eligible by
virtue of these provisions;
[[Page 48609]]
The improvement of UC benefit and tax operations,
including responding to increased demand for UC; and
Staff-assisted reemployment services for UC claimants.
IV-4. Question: Must my State legislature appropriate these special
administrative transfers?
Answer: Federal law does not require such an appropriation. (This
is unlike the incentive payments discussed in Attachment I, which must
be appropriated by the State legislature before they can be used for
administrative purposes.) However, nothing prohibits a State
legislature from appropriating such money or from attaching more
specific or limiting conditions to the use of such money.
IV-5. Question: Do I need to amend my State's UC law?
Answer: Most State UC laws contain permanent provisions regarding
the use of moneys transferred under Section 903, SSA. These provisions
usually mirror the requirements of Section 903(c)(2), SSA, pertaining
to ``traditional'' Reed Act distributions, including a provision that
the moneys be used for the payment of UC unless appropriated by the
legislative body of the State for the administration of the State's UC
law or the State's system of public employment offices.
The special administrative transfer is not, however, available for
the payment of UC and its administrative uses are more limited. As a
result, if the State's UC law permits a broader use, the State must
either (1) amend its UC law to reflect the more limited use of the
special administrative transfer, or (2) interpret its UC law consistent
with the limited uses specified in Section 903(g), SSA. States
exploring the latter option may be able to base their interpretation on
State UC law provisions that require interpretations of State UC law in
a manner consistent with Federal law.
Attachment II to UIPL 39-97 contains draft language for State Reed
Act provisions, which many States used to create their permanent
provisions. For these States, we recommend the following language be
added:
(6) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), moneys credited with respect
to the special transfer made under section 903(g), SSA, may be used
solely for the purposes specified in such section and are not
subject to appropriation by the legislature. [Emphasis added.]
States should modify this language to accord with State usage and to
assure correct State law citations. The emphasized language is
necessary only if the State chooses to avoid the appropriation process
for the special administrative transfer. As an alternative to this
approach, States may also consider a broader amendment that
automatically authorizes the State law to take into account any Federal
law limitations on use not contained in State law.
IV-6. Question: My State has an advance under Title XII, SSA, so
that it can continue to pay benefits. Does this affect my
administrative transfer?
Answer: No. Eligibility for the transfer does not depend upon a
State having no outstanding advance. Therefore, the entire amount of
the special administrative transfer for a State will be transferred to
the State's account in the UTF, notwithstanding any advance.
Attachment V
Suspensions
Interest on Advances and Federal Taxation of UC
Interest Payments
V-1. Question: How did the amendments made by Section 2004 of
Public Law 111-5 affect interest due on Title XII advances?
Answer: Section 2004 added new paragraph (10) to Section 1202(b),
SSA. Under this new paragraph, any interest payment due during the
period beginning on the date of enactment (that is beginning February
17, 2009) and ending on December 31, 2010, shall be ``deemed to have
been'' paid by the State. This effectively waives all interest due
during this period. Further, no interest accrues on any advance or
advances made to a State during this period.
V-2. Question: Will interest accrue on advances made prior to the
date of enactment?
Answer: Yes. Although interest will accrue on such advances, any
interest due within the period beginning February 17, 2009, and ending
on December 31, 2010 will, as discussed in the previous Q&A, be waived.
However, interest accrued after September 30, 2010, will not be due
within this period. Instead, such accrued interest will be due no later
than September 30, 2011.
V-3. Question: How is interest after December 31, 2010, determined?
Answer: The normal rules for determining the amounts of interest
accrued and the dates interest is due will again apply.
Partial Suspension of Federal Income Tax
V-4. Question: How did the amendments made by Public Law 111-5
affect the taxation of unemployment benefits?
Answer: For tax year 2009 only, the first $2,400 paid in
unemployment benefits is not subject to Federal income tax. Amounts
above $2,400 remain taxable.
V-5. Question: Will this suspension require any operational changes
by my agency?
Answer: States are to continue to (1) report UC payments on Form
1099 and (2) withhold Federal income tax from UC benefits when
requested by the individual. States are encouraged to promptly update
information provided to individuals about the taxation of UC so that
individuals may make informed decisions about whether to elect (or
continue) the withholding of Federal income tax from UC.
Attachment VI
Text of Sections 2003 and 2004 of Public Law 111-5
Text may be found at: https://wdr.doleta.gov/directives/attach/UIPL/UIPL14-09f.pdf.
Attachment VII
UC Modernization Distributions--Amounts
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$500 M Admin $7.0 Billion
State Distribution Distribution \1/3\ Share \2/3\ Share
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AK.............................. $1,115,660 $15,619,234 $5,206,411 $10,412,823
AL.............................. 7,176,668 100,473,351 33,491,117 66,982,234
AR.............................. 4,283,524 59,969,332 19,989,777 39,979,555
AZ.............................. 10,721,206 150,096,885 50,032,295 100,064,590
CA.............................. 59,905,736 838,680,283 279,560,094 559,120,189
CO.............................. 9,104,983 127,469,762 42,489,921 84,979,841
CT.............................. 6,272,238 87,811,338 29,270,446 58,540,892
DC.............................. 1,973,784 27,632,982 9,210,994 18,421,988
DE.............................. 1,562,028 21,868,398 7,289,466 14,578,932
[[Page 48610]]
FL.............................. 31,733,965 444,275,516 148,091,839 296,183,677
GA.............................. 15,734,725 220,286,144 73,428,715 146,857,429
HI.............................. 2,180,480 30,526,725 10,175,575 20,351,150
IA.............................. 5,058,171 70,814,387 23,604,796 47,209,591
ID.............................. 2,304,345 32,260,831 10,753,610 21,507,221
IL.............................. 21,510,763 301,150,687 100,383,562 200,767,125
IN.............................. 10,607,023 148,498,323 49,499,441 98,998,882
KS.............................. 4,926,439 68,970,143 22,990,048 45,980,095
KY.............................. 6,441,139 90,175,943 30,058,648 60,117,295
LA.............................. 7,027,524 98,385,331 32,795,110 65,590,221
MA.............................. 11,620,239 162,683,341 54,227,780 108,455,561
MD.............................. 9,053,580 126,750,124 42,250,041 84,500,083
ME.............................. 2,016,519 28,231,263 9,410,421 18,820,842
MI.............................. 14,877,327 208,282,572 69,427,524 138,855,048
MN.............................. 9,290,259 130,063,620 43,354,540 86,709,080
MO.............................. 9,522,006 133,308,082 44,436,027 88,872,055
MS.............................. 4,009,761 56,136,656 18,712,219 37,424,437
MT.............................. 1,394,697 19,525,764 6,508,588 13,017,176
NC.............................. 14,647,397 205,063,552 68,354,517 136,709,035
ND.............................. 1,039,443 14,552,205 4,850,735 9,701,470
NE.............................. 3,116,126 43,625,769 14,541,923 29,083,846
NH.............................. 2,242,944 31,401,220 10,467,073 20,934,147
NJ.............................. 14,773,097 206,823,364 68,941,121 137,882,243
NM.............................. 2,787,327 39,022,582 13,007,527 26,015,055
NV.............................. 5,495,529 76,937,412 25,645,804 51,291,608
NY.............................. 29,481,579 412,742,107 137,580,702 275,161,405
OH.............................. 18,893,471 264,508,588 88,169,529 176,339,059
OK.............................. 5,420,463 75,886,483 25,295,494 50,590,989
OR.............................. 6,112,474 85,574,641 28,524,880 57,049,761
PA.............................. 19,521,393 273,299,496 91,099,832 182,199,664
PR.............................. 2,946,268 41,247,756 13,749,252 27,498,504
RI.............................. 1,675,756 23,460,578 7,820,193 15,640,385
SC.............................. 6,961,392 97,459,490 32,486,497 64,972,993
SD.............................. 1,260,545 17,647,634 5,882,545 11,765,089
TN.............................. 10,129,145 141,808,031 47,269,344 94,538,687
TX.............................. 39,690,810 555,671,344 185,223,781 370,447,563
UT.............................. 4,356,943 60,997,206 20,332,402 40,664,804
VA.............................. 13,460,932 188,453,049 62,817,683 125,635,366
VI.............................. 143,065 2,002,911 667,637 1,335,274
VT.............................. 994,136 13,917,898 4,639,299 9,278,599
WA.............................. 10,470,988 146,593,828 48,864,609 97,729,219
WI.............................. 9,566,720 133,934,079 44,644,693 89,289,386
WV.............................. 2,369,759 33,176,630 11,058,877 22,117,753
WY.............................. 1,017,509 14,245,130 4,748,377 9,496,753
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
US.......................... 500,000,000 7,000,000,000 2,333,333,331 4,666,666,669
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UIPL No. 14-09, Change 1--Special Transfers for Unemployment
Compensation Modernization and Administration and Relief From Interest
on Advances
1. Purpose. To provide additional guidance to States concerning
unemployment compensation (UC) modernization incentive payments, the
recent special administrative transfers, and to correct guidance
related to relief from interest on advances to State unemployment
funds.
2. References. The Assistance for Unemployed Workers and Struggling
Families Act, Title II of Division B of Public Law 111-5, enacted
February 17, 2009; the Social Security Act (SSA); the Federal
Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA); and Unemployment Insurance Program Letter
(UIPL) No. 14-09.
3. Background. UIPL No. 14-09 provided guidance to States on the UC
provisions of Public Law 111-5, including how to qualify for UC
modernization payments. This UIPL, using a Question and Answer (Q&A)
format, provides, among other things:
Additional guidance concerning applications for UC
modernization incentive payments and on using a training benefit
provision to qualify for such payments.
Additional guidance related to the special administrative
transfer.
A correction to earlier guidance related to relief from
interest on advances.
4. Action. State administrators should distribute this advisory to
appropriate staff.
5. Inquiries. Questions should be addressed to your Regional
Office.
6. Attachment. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Attachment
Questions and Answers
UC Modernization--Applications Under ``Permanent'' Laws
CH 1-1. Question. UIPL No. 14-09 provides that applications for
incentive payments should only be made under provisions of State laws
that are currently in effect as permanent law and not subject to
discontinuation. Does this mean that my State may never repeal
[[Page 48611]]
any of the provisions that qualified it for a UC Modernization payment?
Answer: No. If a State eventually decides to repeal or modify any
of these provisions, it may do so, and it will not be required to
return any incentive payments. However, in providing the incentive
payments, Congress clearly intended to support States that had already
adopted certain eligibility provisions and to expand eligibility to
additional beneficiaries by encouraging other States to adopt these
provisions. By specifying that the provisions must be in effect as
permanent law, Congress also made clear its intention that the benefit
expansions not be transitory. While States are free to change or repeal
the provisions on which modernization payments were based subsequent to
receipt of incentive payments, Congress and the Department rely on
States' good faith in adopting the eligibility criteria, and the
application must attest to this good faith as required by the following
Q&A.
CH 1-2. Question: Are there any changes to the application
procedure?
Answer: Yes. Each State's application for incentive payments must
contain a certification that the application is submitted in good faith
with the intention of providing benefits to unemployed workers who meet
the eligibility provisions on which the application is based.
UC Modernization--Training Benefits
CH 1-3. Question: May my State establish a limitation on when the
individual must enroll in training to be eligible for the training
benefit?
Answer: Yes. As a general matter, individuals who were separated
from declining occupations or businesses reducing operations, and who
would benefit from job training, should be placed in appropriate
training as soon as possible. A State law would qualify for
certification if it provided that an individual must be enrolled in
training no later than the end of the benefit year established with
respect to the separation that makes the individual eligible for the
training benefit. (That is, a separation from a declining occupation,
or a separation due to a permanent reduction of operations at the
individual's place of employment.) A State may provide for a longer
period of time, but its application would not be certified if it
provided for a period of time ending prior to the end of the
individuals' benefit year.
States adopting this limitation must notify individuals of the
limitation at the time the State approves their initial claims.
CH 1-4. Question: Q&A III-24 in UIPL No. 14-09 provides that
eligibility for the training benefit may not be terminated by the
expiration of a benefit year. Does this mean that my State may set no
outside limits on payment of the training benefit?
Answer: No. Q&A III-24 was intended to assure that an individual
enrolled and making satisfactory progress in training did not have
eligibility for the training benefit terminated because the benefit
year ended. A State may, however, terminate an individual's training
benefit after the individual has been provided a reasonable period to
collect the entire training benefit. A State law would qualify for
certification if it provided that no training benefits are payable one
year following the end of the benefit year. If a State adopts a shorter
termination date, its application must justify why the date is
reasonable.
CH 1-5. Question: An individual voluntarily quit a job. May my law
deny this individual the training benefit?
Answer: The answer depends upon the fac