Disaster Unemployment Assistance Program; Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

SUMMARY: The agency is considering revision of certain sections of the

implementing regulation of the Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA)

Program. Such revisions would clarify and simplify the States'

administration of the Program which provides a weekly assistance amount

to individuals unemployed as a direct result of a major disaster. The

Department hereby provides an opportunity for public participation in

developing proposed rules. If the Department decides to proceed with

this rulemaking after reviewing the comments filed in response to this

notice, a proposed rule will be published in accordance with the

Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553).

DATES: Written comments on this advance notice of proposed rulemaking

must be received in the Department of Labor on or before February 6,

1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be mailed or delivered to Mary Ann

Wyrsch, Director, Unemployment Insurance Service, Employment and

Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room S4231, 200

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210.

All comments received will be available for public inspection

during normal business hours in Room S4231 at the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Gillham, Group Chief, Federal Programs Group, Division of

Program Development and Implementation, Office of Program Management in

the Unemployment Insurance Service at the above address: Telephone

(202) 219-5312 (this is not a toll-free number). This advanced notice

of proposed rulemaking is available in alternative formats for the

disabled, such as on electronic file, on computer disk and audio tape.

They may be obtained at the above office.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 410(a) of The Robert T. Stafford

Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act) (42 U.S.C.

5177) sets forth the outlines of the DUA Program. The President is

authorized by section 410(a) of the Stafford Act to provide to any

individual unemployed as a result of a major disaster declared by the

President under the Stafford Act ``such benefit assistance as he deems

appropriate while such individual is unemployed for the weeks of such

unemployment with respect to which the individual is not entitled to

any other unemployment compensation * * * or waiting period credit.''

Other terms of section 410(a) provide that disaster unemployment

assistance (DUA) is to be furnished to individuals for no longer than

26 weeks after the major disaster is declared; and for any week of

unemployment a DUA payment is not to exceed the maximum weekly benefit

amount authorized under the unemployment compensation (UC) law of the

State in which the disaster occurred.

Pursuant to a delegation of authority (51 FR 4988, February 10,

1986) to the Secretary of Labor from the Director of the Federal

Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the DUA Program authorized by

section 410(a) of the Stafford Act and the appeals of assistance

provisions at section 423 are implemented in regulations promulgated by

the Department of Labor (Department) and published at Part 625 of title

20 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The DUA program is administered

by the States in accordance with an agreement each State has signed

with the Secretary of Labor.

The DUA Program regulations were last amended with the publishing

of a final rule in the Federal Register on May 16, 1991 (56 FR 22800).

These amendments were basically limited to the changes to the DUA

Program effected by the Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance

Amendments of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-107, November 23, 1988). Prior to the

1991 final rule, the DUA Program regulations were last revised with

publication of a final rule in the Federal Register on September 16,

1977 (42 FR 46712).

From 1977 until the summer of 1993 only occasional questions

(primarily from the State agencies administering the program)

concerning application or interpretation of the regulations to

individual cases arose. The Department was able to respond to these

occasional questions with specific answers relative to the individual

case or to provide other guidance. The questions and responses did not

warrant revisions of the DUA regulations.

However, the major disasters declared in nine Midwest States due to

the magnitude and severity of storms and flooding during the late

spring and summer of 1993 caused the Department to respond to hundreds

of inquiries from the State agencies concerning the DUA Program. These

inquiries stemmed from the diversity of occupations and situations for

thousands of unemployed individuals; the unavailability of individual

and employer records due to flooding; the loss of transportation or

accessibility to roads, bridges, etc.; and the fact that many thousands

of individuals were able to continue partial employment. The

Department's responses ranged from policy interpretations, such as the

use of projected income expected for the year if the disaster had not

occurred for purposes of computing a weekly amount and utilization of

projected income after the disaster for determining reductions from the

weekly amount for partial unemployment during a week, to blanket

extensions of the filing period. These inquiries required the

Department's review of the regulations and its past policy and guidance

before a response could be provided. This review pointed out

inconsistencies, lack of clarity, and unnecessary complexities in the

regulations that hindered the Department's and States' administration

of the DUA Program.

Based on the hundreds of inquiries and questions from the State

agencies administering the program, individuals, Governors, members of

Congress, and other organizations, the Department believes that changes

need to be made to the DUA Program regulations to address the above

concerns. Therefore, the Department has decided to follow the process

described below to make necessary amendments. The Department has also

solicited comments from all the State agencies administering the DUA

Program concerning needed changes. The paramount concern expressed in

all the inquiries mentioned above and comments solicited from the State

agencies dealt with the computation and amount of DUA payable for a

week of unemployment under the provisions of 20 CFR 625.6, ``Disaster

Unemployment Assistance: Weekly Amount.'' Therefore, the Department has

determined that Sec. 625.6 should be amended as expeditiously as

possible in order to provide a simpler, less complex computation of a

reasonable DUA weekly payment to individuals unemployed due to a major

disaster. To that end, the Department is planning to publish separately

in the Federal Register an interim final rule amending Sec. 625.6,

effective upon publication, with a request for comments. Due to the

inconsistencies and unduly restrictive provisions in the current

Sec. 625.6, the Department believes that it is contrary to the public

interest and harmful to potential beneficiaries to not have the changes

in place prior to the seasons of the year when most major disasters

occur. Any comments received on that separate interim final rule

amending Sec. 625.6 will be considered before a final rule is issued.

Comments on the interim final rule should be submitted in accordance

with the instructions provided therein, not as part of this notice.

The purpose of this document is to inform the public of other

provisions in 20 CFR Part 625 to which the Department is considering

amendments, in order to provide the public with an opportunity for

input prior to the specific Departmental proposed regulation. In

addition, comments are requested on any other provisions of 20 CFR Part

625, other than Sec. 625.6.

As a matter of background, the first line of defense to an

individual's unemployment due to a disaster is the UC program. UC

partially replaces wages lost during temporary periods of unemployment

so an individual can continue to obtain certain necessities (food,

clothing, and shelter). Weekly DUA payments are designed to provide UC-

type assistance to the individual who is unemployed as a direct result

of a major disaster declared by the President and is not eligible for

UC. Like UC payments, the DUA Program is designed to provide temporary

partial income replacement in order that the individual unemployment as

a direct result of a major disaster can provide for the necessities of

living. DUA and UC are not programs designed to provide 100 percent

income replacement or to ameliorate business losses to self-employed

individuals who suffer such losses due to a major disaster.

In addition, DUA and UC payments are not based on need. Individuals

must have performed some services indicating an attachment to the

workforce, and, in the cases of DUA, an individual may qualify if the

individual was prevented from commencing employment or self-employment.

This is the major difference between unemployment programs and needs-

based programs.

Therefore, considering that the framework and purpose of the DUA

Program is akin to the UC Program, the Department is considering the

following proposed amendments to 20 CFR Part 625. The Department

requests comments on these proposed amendments as well as any other

provision of 20 CFR 625, other than Sec. 625.6.

Amendments Under Consideration

1. The Department is considering amending Sec. 625.2 to add a

definition for ``Department'' to mean the U.S. Department of Labor and

the Employment and Training Administration (ETA) within the Department.

Under Secretary's Order No. 4-75 (40 FR 18515), ETA has authority to

administer the DUA Program. In various documents issued to implement

the DUA Program, references are made to the Department. Adding the

definition is a technical clarification only to set forth in the

regulations what is commonly understood by customers, such as State

agencies, and is a common practice in all Departmental issuances.

2. The Department is considering amending Sec. 625.2 (s) and (t),

the definitions of an ``unemployed worker'' and ``unemployed self-

employed individual.'' Currently, these definitions include, in part,

individuals who were employed or self-employed, or were to commence

employment or self-employment, in the major disaster area at the time

the major disaster began. The amendment to Sec. 625.2 (s) and (t) would

also include individuals who reside in the major disaster area but are

unable to reach their place of employment or self-employment outside of

the major disaster area, and individuals who must travel through a

major disaster area to their employment or self-employment, but are

unable to do so as a direct result of the major disaster. The

Department is considering this amendment based on the ``liberal

construction'' requirement of Sec. 625.1(b). To limit eligibility for

DUA to only those individuals who were employed or self-employed, or

who were to commence employment or self-employment, in the major

disaster area is a narrow construction and does not carry out the

purposes of the Stafford Act.

This amended definition would recognize that in today's mobile

labor force not everyone resides in or near the location of his/her

employment or self-employment. If a major disaster occurs that directly

prevents the individual from performing services, i.e., meeting one or

more of the causes of unemployment set out in Sec. 625.5, the

individual should not be denied eligibility simply because he/she

actually worked outside the major disaster area or was to commence work

outside the disaster area. The State agency would make the same fact-

finding as it does now for individuals who are unable to reach their

place of employment or self-employment under Sec. 625.5 (a)(2) and

(b)(2). The State agencies would consider factors such as alternate

means of transportation, other routes to work where the major disaster

has disrupted the usual and/or shortest route, commuting patterns in

the area, and the reasonableness of utilizing such alternatives in

order to continue employment or self-employment.

3. The Department is considering amending Sec. 625.4(g) to provide

that an individual must be a citizen or national of the United States

or, if an alien, be in ``satisfactory immigration status,'' as a

condition of eligibility for DUA. This is based on the able and

available requirements common to all State UC laws.

The DUA Program provides for a type of unemployment compensation in

which cash benefits are payable to individuals with respect to their

unemployment as the direct result of a major disaster, which is

analogous to the basis under which compensation is awarded under the

Federal-State UC program. Accordingly, in implementing section 410(a)

of the Stafford Act, Sec. 625.4(g) adapted the able and available

requirement from the Federal-State unemployment compensation program by

requiring the individual to be able and available ``within the meaning

of the applicable State law * * *.''

This able and available requirement pertains to all applicants for

DUA, including aliens. The Department addressed the availability

requirement for unemployment as it pertains to aliens in UIPL 1-86 (51

FR 29713, August 20, 1986) and UIPLs 12-87, 12-87, Change 1, and 6-89

(54 FR 10102, 10113 and 10116, respectively, March 9, 1989). The

Department stated in these documents that an alien must be authorized

to work by the Immigration and Naturalization Service to be available

for work.

Since the able and available provisions of State law apply to the

DUA Program by virtue of Sec. 625.4(g), an alien must be authorized to

work for those weeks for which DUA is claimed in order to be eligible

for DUA. If an alien meets the exception provision of Sec. 625.4(g), in

that an individual injured as a result of the major disaster is deemed

to meet the able and available requirement, such alien must still be in

``satisfactory immigration status'' because the injury does not convey

such status to an alien. The Department plans to amend Sec. 625.4(g) to

make this clear.

The requirement that a DUA claimant be authorized to work during

the period that benefits are claimed also parallels the requirements of

sections 303(f) and 1137(d) of the Social Security Act (SSA) (42 U.S.C.

503(f) and 42 U.S.C. 1320b-7(d), respectively) applicable to UC

programs. The application of these provisions to the DUA Program was

discussed in the preamble of the final rule implementing the 1988

amendments, discussed above, and published in the Federal Register on

May 16, 1991 (56 FR 22800, 22802-22803).

4. The Department is considering amending Sec. 625.4(g) to provide

that a deceased individual will not meet the able and available

requirement within the meaning of the applicable State law after the

date of death. See item 6 of this Advanced Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (ANPRM) which would provide for the new breadwinner or major

support for a household to receive DUA in lieu of the decedent.

5. The Department is considering amending Sec. 625.4 to add a new

paragraph (j). This new paragraph would provide that employment in a

Federal, State or locally funded temporary job designed to assist in

clean-up or other activities to enable the community to recover from

the effects of the major disaster is not employment that renders the

individual ineligible for future DUA once the temporary job ends. Under

the DUA Program, an individual is ineligible for further DUA under a

major disaster declaration if that individual is reemployed in suitable

employment or has commenced services in self-employment, since the

individual would no longer be unemployed as a direct result of the

major disaster. This amendment would clarify the Department's position

that such temporary employment is not suitable employment, since it is

not employment that was or is the individual's principal source of

income and the individual's livelihood was or is dependent on such

employment. Thus, the temporary employment would not disqualify the

individual from continuing to receive DUA after the temporary

employment ends.

6. The Department is considering amending Sec. 625.5,

``Unemployment caused by a major disaster,'' to provide a definition of

the phrase ``as a direct result of the major disaster,'' as utilized

for purposes of Sec. 625.5(a) and (b) in determining if an individual's

unemployment is directly caused by the major disaster. Section 410(a)

of the Stafford Act provides that ``the President is authorized to

provide to any individual unemployed as a result of a major disaster *

* *.'' This same language was in the Disaster Relief Acts of 1969,

1970, and 1974. The Department's regulations have always provided that

the unemployment must be ``as a direct result'' of the major disaster,

but it has never been defined. Over the years, various interpretations

have been applied by the States and the Department, with the result

that some individuals unemployed for indirect or secondary reasons have

been determined eligible. Therefore, to ensure greater uniformity, the

Department is considering defining the phrase ``as a direct result of

the major disaster.''

For purposes of Sec. 625.5(a)(1) and (3) and Sec. 625.5(b)(1) and

(3), the definition would limit eligibility to an unemployed individual

who: (1Z) Can no longer perform services or commerce services in

employment or self-employment because the job site or work location is

made inoperable or is inaccessible as a direct result of the major

disaster or (2) is unable to perform a majority (over 50 percent) of

his/her usual and customary services that were being performed prior to

the major disaster because sales to customers coming to the job site or

work location have been substantially reduced as a direct result of the

major disaster. Examples of reasons that may qualify an individual for

DUA are:

(1) The building(s) where services are performed in employment or

self-employment is destroyed, under water, or has had structural damage

causing it to be closed for safety reasons.

(2) In the case of self-employed farmers or agricultural workers,

the crop land or other real property where services are performed is

under water, destroyed, or otherwise unavailable for performing

services, or the crop(s) ready for harvest have been destroyed or

cannot be harvested.

(3) Power and/or water services that are necessary for performing

services have been disrupted and work sites are closed until utility

services are restored.

(4) Tourists who usually come to a craft and souvenir shop within

the major disaster area no longer are able to come to the major

disaster area because of the disruption caused by the major disaster,

and, therefore, a majority of the services of providing crafts and

souvenirs can no longer be performed.

The intent of amending Sec. 625.5(a)(1) and (3) and

Sec. 625.5(b)(1) and (3) would be to provide equal treatment, for DUA

eligibility purposes, among individuals who produce a product and those

who provide a service (e.g., salespersons, shop owners, suppliers,

etc.). Under the Department's current interpretation, an individual in

the service section is not eligible for DUA if that individual can

perform his/her customary services but customers are not seeking these

services for reasons directly related to the major disaster. This

amendment would change the Department's current interpretation and

provide DUA eligibility (assuming the individual met the other DUA

qualifying requirements) to an unemployed individual providing a

service when a majority of his/her customers are not seeking these

services as a direct result of the major disaster.

On another point, under current Sec. 625.5(a)(2) and (b)(2),

eligibility is limited to those cases where the individual's principal

means of transportation to the job site or work location was made

inoperable or destroyed as a direct result of the major disaster and

there were no reasonable alternative means of transportation. In

addition, under Sec. 625.5(a)(2) and (b)(2), an individual is

considerable unable to reach a place of employment or self-employment

as a direct result of the major disaster if all reasonable routes, by

whatever means of transportation utilized by the individual, are closed

or inaccessible to the individual, and there are no other reasonable

routes or methods of transportation available that could be utilized.

In determining eligibility under the provisions of paragraph (a)(2) and

(b)(2), State agencies currently consider factors such as the normal

commuting patterns and distances for the area, the availability of

alternate transportation, and any attempts by the individual to get to

the work site. The State agencies would continue to utilize the above

factors in determining DUA eligibility under paragraphs (a)(2) and

(b)(2). Paragraphs (a)(2) and (b)(2) of Sec. 625.5 are applicable to

the amendments to Sec. 625.2(s) and (t) that the Department is

considering and are described in item 2 of this ANPRM.

Examples of situations where an individual may be eligible for DUA

are:

(1) The individual's only means of transportation is destroyed or

made inoperable by the disaster and there are no other reasonable means

of transportation available.

(2) The primary route utilized by the individual (private or public

transportation) to the work site or job location is destroyed or made

impassable as a direct result of the major disaster and there are no

reasonable alternate routes or means of transportation available.

(3) An individual, such as a traveling salesperson, over-the-road

or local truck driver, real estate salesperson, or supplier, is unable

to perform a majority (over 50 percent) of the usual and customary

services because of closed or impassable streets or roads to the

location(s) where sales would occur or products are to be delivered.

The Department is also considering amending Sec. 625.5(a)(5) and

(b)(4) to clarify its position on individuals who are unable to perform

services in employment or self-employment because of an injury caused

as a direct result of the major disaster. The Department has

interpreted these paragraphs to mean that the injury must have been

accidental and coincidental with the disaster, not as a result of

individuals putting themselves in a position (by personal choice not

directly related to the individual's employment or self-employment)

where there was likelihood or risk of personal injury or other physical

harm due to the individuals' overall health condition(s).

Some examples of injuries not caused as a direct result of the

major disaster are:

(1) An individual does not report to work because he/she elects to

participate in sandbagging activities to prevent flooding of the

community and, as a result, suffers an injury.

(2) An individual elects not to report to work because he/she

elects to repair damage to his/her house caused by the major disaster,

and the individual is injured while doing the repairs.

Examples of injuries caused as a direct result of a major disaster

where an individual may be eligible for DUA are:

(1) An individual is asleep at home and a tornado strikes the house

injuring the individual.

(2) An individual is performing service in employment or self-

employment at a work site and an explosion or fire occurs as a direct

result of a major disaster causing the individual to be injured.

(3) While traveling to or from the worksite, the individual is

injured as the result of the destruction of the mode of transportation

used which is the direct result of the major disaster.

(4) While carrying out normal day-to-day activities not associated

with the effects of the major disaster (e.g., going to the grocery

store or doing usual household chores), the individual is injured as a

direct result of the major disaster.

The above examples indicate situations where individuals may be

considered unemployed as a direct result of a major disaster under the

amendments to Sec. 625.5 the Department is considering. They illustrate

the direct link between the major disaster and the individuals'

unemployment that the Department would require, but they are not

limiting situations. They reflect the Department's position that an

individual's unemployment must be the immediate result of the major

disaster--the major disaster must be the primary cause of the

unemployment, not some remote, indirect or distant cause of the

individual's unemployment or loss of income, as would be the case where

the injury stemmed from a personal choice related to the major

disaster. In this regard, the Department recognizes that individuals

may be faced with personal choices such as protecting property and

family. However, in these situations, the unemployment of the

individual may not be the direct result of the major disaster, but may

be the result of the personal choice which is an indirect or secondary

link to the major disaster.

For purposes of Sec. 625.5(a)(4), the Department is considering

adopting the following position on an individual who becomes the

breadwinner or major support for a household because the head of the

household has died as a direct result of the major disaster. The

Department is considering a requirement that the deceased head of the

household must have been a wage earning member of the household related

by blood, marriage, adoption, or other legal arrangement to the

individual who becomes the breadwinner or major support for the

household, and who shared a common residence with the individual. The

deceased wage earning head of household must have provided, through

employment for wages, one-half or more of the household income or means

of livelihood during the base period utilized for purposes of computing

a DUA weekly amount under Sec. 625.6, or would have provided such

income but for unemployment during the base period.

7. The Department is considering amending Sec. 625.8(a) to provide

that the period to file a timely DUA initial application is 60 days

from the date of the State agency's announcement of the availability of

DUA, or, if longer, the period announced by FEMA for individuals to

file for other disaster relief programs under the jurisdiction or

coordination of FEMA. For those few major disaster declarations where

DUA is the only disaster relief program authorized in the agreement

between FEMA and the Governor of the State in which the major disaster

was declared, the Department is considering a filing deadline of 60

days from the announcement date of the major disaster. This deadline,

at the request of the State agency for good cause, could be uniformly

extended by the Department for all DUA applicants filing in the State.

In no event, however, would any extension of the timely filing period

granted by the Department extend beyond 15 days after the expiration of

the Disaster Assistance Period. The current provision in Sec. 625.8(a)

that authorizes acceptance of an application filed more than 30 days

after the State agency's announcement of the availability of DUA if an

individual had good cause for the late filing would be considered for

elimination for the following reasons.

During the past few years the Department has received numerous

requests from State agencies to authorize a blanket extension of the

filing period for good cause for all individuals who are filing after

the end of the 30-day announced filing period rather than the State

agency having to determine good cause for late filing on an individual

basis. Good cause has existed because of: concern about the successful

notification of the availability of DUA to the entire potential

applicant population; local State Agency offices being damaged or

closed; destruction of roads and bridges that applicants would normally

use to reach a local office; several amendments to major disaster

declarations adding additional jurisdictions causing confusion on

timely filing periods; and various other reasons. In addition, the

current last filing date for the FEMA-announced disaster relief program

does not coincide with the separately announced filing period for DUA.

This has caused DUA applicants further confusion and, in some

instances, to miss the DUA filing deadline because of the assumption

that all disaster relief programs had the same filing period. Other

Federal agencies, such as the Small Business Administration utilize the

FEMA-determined filing deadline for its programs. The FEMA-determined

filing period is applicable to an entire State or, in the case of the

Midwest flooding, to all the States. Adoption of this change to

Sec. 625.8(a) would eliminate the confusion surrounding amendments made

to declarations and would have the various disaster relief programs

utilizing the same ending date.

The State agencies' requests for a blanket extension of the filing

period have usually been for 30 days. When approved by the Department,

this has resulted in a 60-day filing period, and this time period

equals the 60-day period the Department is considering as a proposed

amendment. Therefore, the Department does not expect many requests to

be made for extensions, but it is the Department's view that provision

should be made for them in the regulations.

8. The Department is considering amending Sec. 625.8(c) to add a

new paragraph to provide that an authorized legal representative, as

determined under the laws of the applicable State, may file a DUA

application and take any subsequent action on the application (such as

an appeal) on behalf of an incapacitated applicant or an applicant's

estate. This regulatory provision would set forth the Department's

position and guidance now provided in UIPL No. 29-91.

9. The Department is considering amending Sec. 625.14(c) to provide

for two changes concerning exceptions to the recovery by offset of any

debt due the United States. Section 625.14(c) provides that any DUA

payable to an individual shall be applied by the State agency for the

recovery by offset of any debt due the United States. It also provides

that DUA payable shall not be applied or used by the State agency in

any manner for the payment of any debt of the individual to any State

or any other entity or person. The literal reading of this provision

would limit offset to only those instances where a Federal debt is due.

However, since the provisions of Sec. 625.14(c) went into effect,

Federal laws have been amended to require the offset of UC for child

support obligations being enforced under title IV-D of the SSA (section

303(e)(2)(A)(iii), SSA; 42 U.S.C. 503(e)(2)(A)(iii)), as well as to

make optional the offset of food stamp over-issuances (section

303(d)(2)(B)(iii), SSA; 42 U.S.C. 503(d)(2)(B)(iii)). DUA payments are

considered to be UC under 26 U.S.C. 85(c) and are, therefore, subject

to the requirements of section 303(e)(2)(A)(iii) of the SSA in the case

of child support obligations. Therefore, the Department is considering

amending Sec. 625.14(c) to include the requirements for the offset of

DUA for child support obligations being enforced under title IV-D of

the SSA. The Department is also considering amending Sec. 625.14(c) to

require the offset of DUA for food stamp over-issuances if the State

makes such offsets under its State UC program.

In addition, States are permitted to enter into cross-program

offset agreements with the Secretary of Labor in accordance with

section 303(g) of the SSA (42 U.S.C. 503(g)). In the final rule

published May 16, 1991 (cited above), the Department added a new

paragraph (3) to Sec. 625.14(b) providing that if the State has an

agreement in effect to implement the cross-program offset provisions of

section 303(g)(2) of the SSA, the provisions of such agreement are

applicable to the DUA Program. However, no language was added to

Sec. 625.14(c) to provide that if a State had a cross-program offset

agreement in place under the provisions of section 303(g) of the SSA,

intercept of DUA could be made to liquidate a debt due a State UC

program. See UIPL 50-86 (51 FR 29713, 34273). For this reason, the

Department is considering an amendment to Sec. 625.14(c) to provide for

the intercept of DUA to liquidate a debt due the State UC program if

the State has a cross-offset agreement under the section 303(g) of the

SSA in place.

10. The Department is considering amending Sec. 625.14(j), Criminal

penalties, to specifically provide that the applicable Federal law

under which an individual is subject to prosecution is 18 U.S.C. 1001.

In addition, State agencies would be required to notify each applicant

at the time of filing an initial application for DUA of the possibility

of criminal prosecution under Sec. 1001 for fraudulently claiming DUA.

11. The Department is considering amending Sec. 625.17,

``Announcement of the beginning of a Disaster Assistance Period,'' to

instruct the States to issue a notification setting the DUA filing

deadline not later than the applicable date determined in accordance

with Sec. 625.8. This provision would accommodate any filing period

proposed under the amendments to Sec. 625.8 described in item 6 of this

ANPRM.

Comments Invited

The Department invites comments on the proposals listed above, or

any other area of the DUA regulations, except Sec. 625.6, that the

public views as needing clarification or amending. Comments on

Sec. 625.6 may be filed in response to the separate rulemaking action

to be published in the Federal Register.

Drafting Information

This document was prepared under the direction and control of the

Director, Unemployment Insurance Service, Employment and Training

Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20210: Telephone (202) 219-7831 (this is not a toll-free

number).

Classification--Executive Order 12866

This advance notice of proposed rulemaking provided in this

document is classified as a ``significant regulatory action'' under

Executive Order 12866 on Federal Regulations. The resulting final rule

may:

(1) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements or the

rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or

(2) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal

mandates and the President's priorities. It is not likely to:

(3) Result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or

more;

(4) Create a serious inconsistency or interfere with action taken

or planned by another agency.

Any cost and benefit analysis or assessment of the potential effects

cannot be made with this advance notice of proposed rulemaking since

the scope of the amendments will not be finalized until the notice of

proposed rulemaking is completed based on comments received to this

advance notice.

Paperwork Reduction Act

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C.

Ch 35, approval has been obtained from the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) for the recordkeeping and reporting requirements under

Sec. 625.16(a) for the DUA forms ETA 90-2, 81, 81A, 82, 83, and 84. The

OMB control number for the 90-2 is 1205-0234, and for the 81, 81A, 82,

83, and 84 it is 1205-0051. OMB approval has also been obtained for the

recordkeeping and reporting requirements under Sec. 625.19(b), under

OMB control number 1205-0051.

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number

This program is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic

Assistance at No. 17.225, ``Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA).''

Lists of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 625

Disaster Unemployment Assistance, Labor, reemployment services,

unemployment compensation.

Signed at Washington, DC, on December 1, 1994.

Doug Ross,

Assistant Secretary of Labor.

[FR Doc. 94-30234 Filed 12-7-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-30-M