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. 

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 (http://www.msha.gov) and then 

choosing Statutory and Regulatory 

Information and Federal Register 

Documents. 

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) 

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: http:// 

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: http:// 

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. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices 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 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

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. 

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 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices 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 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. 

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 

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 

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 

(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, 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices 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 ‘‘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? 

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 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

48608 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / 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 

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; 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices 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: http:// 

wdr.doleta.gov/directives/attach/UIPL/ 

UIPL14–09f.pdf. 

Attachment VII 

UC MODERNIZATION DISTRIBUTIONS—AMOUNTS

State $500 M Admin 

Distribution 

$7.0 Billion 

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

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

48610 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices 

UC MODERNIZATION DISTRIBUTIONS—AMOUNTS—Continued 

State $500 M Admin 

Distribution 

$7.0 Billion 

Distribution 1⁄3 Share 2⁄3 Share 

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 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Notices 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 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 

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 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

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 

[Notice (09–080)] 

Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive 

License 

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration. 

ACTION: Notice of Intent to grant 

exclusive license. 

SUMMARY: 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 

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 http:// 

technology.nasa.gov/. 

Dated: September 15, 2009. 

Richard W. Sherman, 

Deputy General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. E9–22847 Filed 9–22–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7510–13–P 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

[Notice (09–081)] 

Privacy Act of 1974; Privacy Act 

System of Records 

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. 

DATES: These changes will take effect 30 

calendar days from the date of this 

publication. 

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] 

BILLING CODE 7510–03–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

Sunshine Federal Register Notice 

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 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES