Comment Request for Information Collection on Employment and Training (ET) Handbook 361, Unemployment Insurance (UI) Data Validation (DV), Extension With Revisions, 41452-41453 [2012-17068]

Download as PDF 41452 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 135 / Friday, July 13, 2012 / Notices currently scheduled to transmit its determinations to the Secretary of Commerce on or before July 20, 2012; Commissioners’ opinions are currently scheduled to be transmitted to the Secretary of Commerce on or before July 27, 2012. 5. Outstanding action jackets: none. In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the agenda of the following meeting. By order of the Commission: Issued: July 9, 2012. Lisa R. Barton, Acting Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2012–17275 Filed 7–11–12; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Notice is hereby given that on July 6, 2012, a proposed Complaint was filed and a proposed Consent Decree lodged in the case of United States and the State of Missouri v. Kellwood Company, Civil Action No. 12–1216, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The United States and the State filed a Complaint alleging that Defendant Kellwood Company is liable pursuant to Sections 106 and 107 of CERCLA in connection with Operable Units 2 and 6 of the Riverfront Superfund Site (‘‘Site’’) located in and around New Haven, Missouri. EPA issued a Record of Decision on May 13, 2011 selecting a remedy to address tetrachloroethene (‘‘PCE’’) contamination at Operable Units 2 and 6 of the Site. The proposed Consent Decree requires Kellwood Company to perform the remedial action for Operable Units 2 and 6 in accordance with the Record of Decision and an attached Statement of Work. The proposed Consent Decree also requires Kellwood Company to reimburse all of EPA’s past costs and the future costs to be incurred by EPA and the State for Operable Units 2 and 6. For thirty (30) days after the date of this publication, the Department of Justice will receive comments relating to the Consent Decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and either emailed to pubcomment-ees.enrd@usdoj.gov or mailed to P.O. Box 7611, U.S. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:08 Jul 12, 2012 Jkt 226001 Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20044–7611, and should refer to United States and the State of Missouri v. Kellwood Company, D.J. Ref. No. 90–11– 2–08795/1. During the public comment period, the Consent Decree may be examined on the following Department of Justice Web site, to https://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/ Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of Consent Decree may also be obtained by mail from the Consent Decree Library, P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20044–7611 or by faxing or emailing a request to ‘‘Consent Decree Copy’’ (EESCDCopy.ENRD@usdoj.gov), fax no. (202) 514–0097, phone confirmation number (202) 514–5271. If requesting a copy from the Consent Decree Library by mail, please enclose a check in the amount of $41.00 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the U.S. Treasury or, if requesting by email or fax, forward a check in that amount to the Consent Decree Library at the address given above. In requesting a copy exclusive of exhibits, please enclose a check in the amount of $13.00 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the U.S. Treasury. Robert E. Maher, Jr., Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural Resource Division. [FR Doc. 2012–17054 Filed 7–12–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410–15–P Employment and Training Administration Comment Request for Information Collection on Employment and Training (ET) Handbook 361, Unemployment Insurance (UI) Data Validation (DV), Extension With Revisions Employment and Training Administration (ETA), Labor. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: The Department of Labor (Department), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a preclearance consultation program to provide the public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)]. This program helps ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 I. Background Section 303(a)(6) of the Social Security Act specifies that the Secretary of Labor will not certify State UI programs to receive administrative grants unless the State’s law includes provisions for— making of such reports * * * as the Secretary of Labor may from time to time require, and compliance with such provisions as the Secretary may from time to time find necessary to assure the correctness and verification of such reports. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR SUMMARY: resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirements on respondents can be properly assessed. Currently, ETA is soliciting comments concerning the collection of data for the UI DV program. Collection authority for this program expires July 31, 2014. DATES: Written comments must be submitted to the office listed in the addresses section below on or before September 11, 2012. ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to Burman Skrable, Room S–4524, Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210. Telephone number: 202–693–3197 (this is not a toll-free number). Individuals with hearing or speech impairments may access the telephone number above via TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at 1–877– 889–5627 (TTY/TDD). Email: skrable.burman@dol.gov. A copy of the proposed information collection request (ICR) can be obtained by contacting the office listed above. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department considers data validation one of those ‘‘provisions * * * necessary to assure the correctness and verification’’ of the reports it requires. The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) requires Federal agencies to develop annual and strategic performance plans that establish performance goals, have concrete indicators of the extent that goals are achieved, and set performance targets. Each year, the agency is to issue a report that ‘‘evaluate[s] the performance plan for the current fiscal year relative to the performance achieved toward the performance goals in the fiscal year covered by the report.’’ Section 1116 (d)(2) of OMB Circular A– 11, which implements the GPRA process, cites the Reports Consolidation Act of 2000 to emphasize the need for data validation by requiring that the agency’s annual performance report E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM 13JYN1 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 135 / Friday, July 13, 2012 / Notices ‘‘contain an assessment of the completeness and reliability of the performance data included in it [that] * * * describes any material inadequacies in the completeness and reliability of the data.’’ (OMB Circular A–11, Section 230.2 (f)). The Department emphasizes the importance of complete and accurate information for program monitoring and improving program performance. The UI DV program employs a refined and automated approach to review 322 elements reported on 13 benefits reports and one tax report. The Department uses many of these elements for key performance measures as well as for workload items. The validation process assesses the validity (accuracy) of the counts of transactions or measurements of status as follows. In the validation process, guided by a detailed handbook, the state first constructs extract files containing all pertinent individual transactions for the desired report period to be validated. These transactions are grouped into 15 benefits and five tax populations. Each transaction record contains the necessary characteristics or dimensions that enable it to be summed into an independent recount of what the state has already reported. The Department provides state agencies with software that edits the extract file (to identify and remove duplicate transactions and improperly built records, for example), then aggregates the transactions to produce an independent reconstruction or ‘‘validation count’’ of the reported figure. The reported count is considered valid by this ‘‘quantity’’ validation test if it is within ±2% of the validation count (±1% for a GPRA-related element). The software also draws samples of most transaction types from the extract files. Guided by a state-specific handbook, the validators review these sample records against documentation in the state’s management information system to determine whether the transactions in the extract file are supported by system documentation. This qualitative check determines whether the validation count can be trusted as accurate. The benefits extract files are considered to pass this ‘‘quality’’ review if random samples indicate that no more than 5% of the records contain errors; tax files are subjected to different but related tests. A reported count is considered valid only if it differs from a reconstructed (validation) count by no more than the appropriate criterion of ±2% or ±1%, and that validation count comes from an VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:08 Jul 12, 2012 Jkt 226001 extract file that has satisfied all quality tests. For Federal fiscal years 2011 and beyond, all states will be required to conduct a complete validation every three years. In three cases the three-year rule does not apply, and a revalidation must occur within one year: (1) Groups of reported counts that are summed for purposes of making a Pass/Fail determination and do not pass validation by being within ±2% of the reconstructed counts or the extract file does not pass all quality tests; (2) the validation applies to the two benefits populations and one tax population used for GPRA measures; and (3) reports are produced by new reporting software. Every year states must also certify that Module 3 of the Benefits and Tax handbooks are up to date. In January 2012 through UIPL 08–12 the Department issued changes that added 100 cells to the ETA 227 report; most of these cells will be validated through the UI DV program. The ETA 227 report is now validated through three of the 15 benefit populations. Accommodating the new report cells requires: (1) Adding a sixteenth benefit population; (2) making one-time changes to the three populations that validate the old 227 report; and (3) adding 13 items (called Steps or Substeps) to Module 3 of the Benefits handbook, which relates State definitions and data system locations for Federal reporting requirements. These changes will impose both one-time and continuing burdens on state validators. II. Review Focus The Department is particularly interested in comments which: • 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. PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 41453 III. Current Actions Type of Review: Extension with revisions. Title: Unemployment Insurance Data Validation Benefits and Tax. OMB Number: 1205–0431. Affected Public: State Workforce Agencies. Form(s): ET Handbook 361. Total Annual Respondents: 53. Annual Frequency: At least five validation items per state (two benefits populations and one tax population) plus reviewing and certifying that Benefits and Tax Module items are up to date. Total Annual Estimated Responses: 265 (53 states × 5 populations). Average Time per Response: 573 Hours. Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 30,369 Hours. Total Annual Burden Cost for Respondents: $1,244,825.31. Comments submitted in response to this comment request will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of the ICR; they will also become a matter of public record. Dated: Signed on this 5th day of July 2012. Jane Oates, Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training, Labor. [FR Doc. 2012–17068 Filed 7–12–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FW–P NATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR THE ARTS AND HUMANITIES Submission for OMB Review, Comment Request, Proposed Collection: General Clearance for Guidelines, Applications, and Reporting Forms Institute of Museum and Library Services, National Foundation for the Arts and Humanities. ACTION: Submission for OMB Review, Comment Request. AGENCY: The Institute of Museum and Library Services announces the following information collection has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TTY/TDD) may call 202–653–4614. This review helps to ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM 13JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 135 (Friday, July 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41452-41453]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-17068]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration


Comment Request for Information Collection on Employment and 
Training (ET) Handbook 361, Unemployment Insurance (UI) Data Validation 
(DV), Extension With Revisions

AGENCY: Employment and Training Administration (ETA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Labor (Department), as part of its 
continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a 
preclearance consultation program to provide the public and Federal 
agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing 
collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995 [44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)]. This program helps ensure that 
requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden 
(time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are 
clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirements on 
respondents can be properly assessed.
    Currently, ETA is soliciting comments concerning the collection of 
data for the UI DV program. Collection authority for this program 
expires July 31, 2014.

DATES: Written comments must be submitted to the office listed in the 
addresses section below on or before September 11, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to Burman Skrable, Room S-4524, 
Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210. Telephone number: 202-
693-3197 (this is not a toll-free number). Individuals with hearing or 
speech impairments may access the telephone number above via TTY by 
calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at 1-877-889-
5627 (TTY/TDD). Email: skrable.burman@dol.gov. A copy of the proposed 
information collection request (ICR) can be obtained by contacting the 
office listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

    Section 303(a)(6) of the Social Security Act specifies that the 
Secretary of Labor will not certify State UI programs to receive 
administrative grants unless the State's law includes provisions for--

making of such reports * * * as the Secretary of Labor may from time 
to time require, and compliance with such provisions as the 
Secretary may from time to time find necessary to assure the 
correctness and verification of such reports.

    The Department considers data validation one of those ``provisions 
* * * necessary to assure the correctness and verification'' of the 
reports it requires.
    The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) requires 
Federal agencies to develop annual and strategic performance plans that 
establish performance goals, have concrete indicators of the extent 
that goals are achieved, and set performance targets. Each year, the 
agency is to issue a report that ``evaluate[s] the performance plan for 
the current fiscal year relative to the performance achieved toward the 
performance goals in the fiscal year covered by the report.'' Section 
1116 (d)(2) of OMB Circular A-11, which implements the GPRA process, 
cites the Reports Consolidation Act of 2000 to emphasize the need for 
data validation by requiring that the agency's annual performance 
report

[[Page 41453]]

``contain an assessment of the completeness and reliability of the 
performance data included in it [that] * * * describes any material 
inadequacies in the completeness and reliability of the data.'' (OMB 
Circular A-11, Section 230.2 (f)). The Department emphasizes the 
importance of complete and accurate information for program monitoring 
and improving program performance.
    The UI DV program employs a refined and automated approach to 
review 322 elements reported on 13 benefits reports and one tax report. 
The Department uses many of these elements for key performance measures 
as well as for workload items.
    The validation process assesses the validity (accuracy) of the 
counts of transactions or measurements of status as follows. In the 
validation process, guided by a detailed handbook, the state first 
constructs extract files containing all pertinent individual 
transactions for the desired report period to be validated. These 
transactions are grouped into 15 benefits and five tax populations. 
Each transaction record contains the necessary characteristics or 
dimensions that enable it to be summed into an independent recount of 
what the state has already reported. The Department provides state 
agencies with software that edits the extract file (to identify and 
remove duplicate transactions and improperly built records, for 
example), then aggregates the transactions to produce an independent 
reconstruction or ``validation count'' of the reported figure. The 
reported count is considered valid by this ``quantity'' validation test 
if it is within 2% of the validation count (1% 
for a GPRA-related element).
    The software also draws samples of most transaction types from the 
extract files. Guided by a state-specific handbook, the validators 
review these sample records against documentation in the state's 
management information system to determine whether the transactions in 
the extract file are supported by system documentation. This 
qualitative check determines whether the validation count can be 
trusted as accurate. The benefits extract files are considered to pass 
this ``quality'' review if random samples indicate that no more than 5% 
of the records contain errors; tax files are subjected to different but 
related tests. A reported count is considered valid only if it differs 
from a reconstructed (validation) count by no more than the appropriate 
criterion of 2% or 1%, and that validation 
count comes from an extract file that has satisfied all quality tests.
    For Federal fiscal years 2011 and beyond, all states will be 
required to conduct a complete validation every three years. In three 
cases the three-year rule does not apply, and a revalidation must occur 
within one year: (1) Groups of reported counts that are summed for 
purposes of making a Pass/Fail determination and do not pass validation 
by being within 2% of the reconstructed counts or the 
extract file does not pass all quality tests; (2) the validation 
applies to the two benefits populations and one tax population used for 
GPRA measures; and (3) reports are produced by new reporting software. 
Every year states must also certify that Module 3 of the Benefits and 
Tax handbooks are up to date.
    In January 2012 through UIPL 08-12 the Department issued changes 
that added 100 cells to the ETA 227 report; most of these cells will be 
validated through the UI DV program. The ETA 227 report is now 
validated through three of the 15 benefit populations. Accommodating 
the new report cells requires: (1) Adding a sixteenth benefit 
population; (2) making one-time changes to the three populations that 
validate the old 227 report; and (3) adding 13 items (called Steps or 
Substeps) to Module 3 of the Benefits handbook, which relates State 
definitions and data system locations for Federal reporting 
requirements. These changes will impose both one-time and continuing 
burdens on state validators.

II. Review Focus

    The Department is particularly interested in comments which:
     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.

III. Current Actions

    Type of Review: Extension with revisions.
    Title: Unemployment Insurance Data Validation Benefits and Tax.
    OMB Number: 1205-0431.
    Affected Public: State Workforce Agencies.
    Form(s): ET Handbook 361.
    Total Annual Respondents: 53.
    Annual Frequency: At least five validation items per state (two 
benefits populations and one tax population) plus reviewing and 
certifying that Benefits and Tax Module items are up to date.
    Total Annual Estimated Responses: 265 (53 states x 5 populations).
    Average Time per Response: 573 Hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 30,369 Hours.
    Total Annual Burden Cost for Respondents: $1,244,825.31.
    Comments submitted in response to this comment request will be 
summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of the ICR; 
they will also become a matter of public record.

    Dated: Signed on this 5th day of July 2012.
Jane Oates,
Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training, Labor.
[FR Doc. 2012-17068 Filed 7-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FW-P