Employment and Training Administration, 64450-64451 [2015-26944]
Download as PDF
64450
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 205 / Friday, October 23, 2015 / Notices
6(a) of the Act. The Department of
Justice published a notice in the Federal
Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the
Act on April 22, 2015 (80 FR 22551).
The last notification was filed with
the Department on May 19, 2015. A
notice was published in the Federal
Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the
Act on June 8, 2015 (80 FR 32411).
Patricia A. Brink,
Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust
Division.
6(b) of the Act on March 7, 2013 (78 FR
14836).
The last notification was filed with
the Department on June 29, 2015. A
notice was published in the Federal
Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the
Act on July 29, 2015 (80 FR 45233).
Patricia A. Brink,
Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust
Division.
[FR Doc. 2015–27040 Filed 10–22–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
[FR Doc. 2015–27044 Filed 10–22–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Employment and Training
Administration
Antitrust Division
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Notice Pursuant to the National
Cooperative Research and Production
Act of 1993—Members of SGIP 2.0, Inc.
Notice is hereby given that, on
September 25, 2015, pursuant to section
6(a) of the National Cooperative
Research and Production Act of 1993,
15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’),
Members of SGIP 2.0, Inc. (‘‘MSGIP
2.0’’) has filed written notifications
simultaneously with the Attorney
General and the Federal Trade
Commission disclosing changes in its
membership. The notifications were
filed for the purpose of extending the
Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of
antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages
under specified circumstances.
Specifically, Coergon, Boulder, CO;
CleanSpark LLC, Poway, CA; Minnesota
Public Utilities Commission, St. Paul,
MN; Indra Systems Inc., Miami, FL;
Energy Surety Partners LLC, Phoenix,
AZ; and Jamaica Public Service
Company Ltd., Kingston 5, JAMAICA,
have been added as parties to this
venture.
Also, Gas Technology Institute, Des
Moines, IA; MidAmerican Energy
Company, Davenport, IA; Opower,
Arlington, VA; Businovation, LLC,
Basking Ridge, NJ; and Machine-toMachine Intelligence Corporation
(M2Mi), Moffett Field, CA, have
withdrawn as parties to this venture.
No other changes have been made in
either the membership or planned
activity of the group research project.
Membership in this group research
project remains open, and MSGIP 2.0
intends to file additional written
notifications disclosing all changes in
membership.
On February 5, 2013, MSGIP 2.0 filed
its original notification pursuant to
section 6(a) of the Act. The Department
of Justice published a notice in the
Federal Register pursuant to section
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:05 Oct 22, 2015
Jkt 238001
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
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 May 31, 2016.
DATES: Submit written comments to the
office listed in the addresses section
below on or before December 22, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to
Rachel Beistel, Room S–4519,
Employment and Training
Administration, U.S. Department of
Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20210. Telephone
number: 202–693–2736 (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:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Beistel.Rachel@dol.gov. To obtain a
copy of the proposed information
collection request (ICR), please contact
the person 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
‘‘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 analysis.
The validation process assesses the
validity (accuracy) of the counts of
transactions or measurements of status
as follows. 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 16 benefits
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 205 / Friday, October 23, 2015 / Notices
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 the 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 August 2015, through
Unemployment Insurance Program
Letter 08–12, Change 1, the Department
issued changes that increased the high
dollar overpayment threshold from
$5,000 to $25,000 on the ETA 227
report. The ETA 227 report is validated
through four of the 16 benefit
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:05 Oct 22, 2015
Jkt 238001
populations. Only the validation of
Benefits Population 12 will be affected
by the new threshold of $25,000.
Accommodating the new threshold
requires: (1) Changing the threshold
amount in the data validation database
programming; (2) making one-time
changes to two rows of data that
validate the 227 report; and (3) adapting
the affected Overpayment rules (called
Steps or Substeps) to Module 3 of the
Benefits handbook, which contains
State definitions and data system
locations for Federal reporting
requirements. These changes will
impose little to no additional burden 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 Program.
OMB Number: 1205–0431.
Affected Public: State Workforce
Agencies.
Form(s): ET Handbook 361.
Estimated 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.
Estimated Total Annual Responses:
265 (53 states × 5 populations).
Average Time per Response: 446
Hours.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 23,644 Hours.
Total Annual Burden Cost for
Respondents: $1,115,997.
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
64451
We will summarize and/or include in
the request for OMB approval of the
ICR, the comments received in response
to this comment request; they will also
become a matter of public record.
Portia Wu,
Assistant Secretary for Employment and
Training, Labor.
[FR Doc. 2015–26944 Filed 10–22–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FW–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Office of the Secretary
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Submission for OMB
Review; Comment Request; Prohibited
Transaction Exemption 1990–1,
Insurance Company Pooled Separate
Accounts
ACTION:
Notice.
The Department of Labor
(DOL) is submitting the Employee
Benefits Security Administration
(EBSA) sponsored information
collection request (ICR) titled,
‘‘Prohibited Transaction Exemption
1990–1, Insurance Company Pooled
Separate Accounts,’’ to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval for continued use,
without change, in accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Public
comments on the ICR are invited.
DATES: The OMB will consider all
written comments that agency receives
on or before November 23, 2015.
ADDRESSES: A copy of this ICR with
applicable supporting documentation;
including a description of the likely
respondents, proposed frequency of
response, and estimated total burden
may be obtained free of charge from the
RegInfo.gov Web site at https://
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/
PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=201509-1210-001
(this link will only become active on the
day following publication of this notice)
or by contacting Michel Smyth by
telephone at 202–693–4129, TTY 202–
693–8064, (these are not toll-free
numbers) or by email at DOL_PRA_
PUBLIC@dol.gov.
Submit comments about this request
by mail or courier to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL–EBSA,
Office of Management and Budget,
Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202–
395–5806 (this is not a toll-free
number); or by email: OIRA_
submission@omb.eop.gov. Commenters
are encouraged, but not required, to
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 205 (Friday, October 23, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64450-64451]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-26944]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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 May 31, 2016.
DATES: Submit written comments to the office listed in the addresses
section below on or before December 22, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Rachel Beistel, Room S-4519,
Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210. Telephone number: 202-
693-2736 (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: Beistel.Rachel@dol.gov. To obtain a copy of the
proposed information collection request (ICR), please contact the
person 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 ``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 analysis.
The validation process assesses the validity (accuracy) of the
counts of transactions or measurements of status as follows. 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 16 benefits
[[Page 64451]]
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 the 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 August 2015, through Unemployment Insurance Program Letter 08-
12, Change 1, the Department issued changes that increased the high
dollar overpayment threshold from $5,000 to $25,000 on the ETA 227
report. The ETA 227 report is validated through four of the 16 benefit
populations. Only the validation of Benefits Population 12 will be
affected by the new threshold of $25,000. Accommodating the new
threshold requires: (1) Changing the threshold amount in the data
validation database programming; (2) making one-time changes to two
rows of data that validate the 227 report; and (3) adapting the
affected Overpayment rules (called Steps or Substeps) to Module 3 of
the Benefits handbook, which contains State definitions and data system
locations for Federal reporting requirements. These changes will impose
little to no additional burden 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 Program.
OMB Number: 1205-0431.
Affected Public: State Workforce Agencies.
Form(s): ET Handbook 361.
Estimated 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.
Estimated Total Annual Responses: 265 (53 states x 5 populations).
Average Time per Response: 446 Hours.
Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 23,644 Hours.
Total Annual Burden Cost for Respondents: $1,115,997.
We will summarize and/or include in the request for OMB approval of
the ICR, the comments received in response to this comment request;
they will also become a matter of public record.
Portia Wu,
Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training, Labor.
[FR Doc. 2015-26944 Filed 10-22-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FW-P