[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 114 (Friday, June 13, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35429-35444]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-14857]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration


Workforce Security Programs: Unemployment Insurance Program 
Letter Interpreting Federal Law

    The Employment and Training Administration interprets federal law 
requirements pertaining to unemployment compensation (UC). These 
interpretations are issued in Unemployment Insurance Programs Letters 
(UIPLs) to State Workforce Agencies. The UIPL described below is 
published in the Federal Register in order to inform the public.

UIPL 30-02, Changes 2 and 3

    UIPL 30-02, Changes 2 and 3 and their attachments provide the 
states with the requirements of the Temporary Extended Unemployment 
Compensation (TEUC) Act of 2002, as deemed amended by Section 4002 of 
Public Law 108-11, as operating instructions and responses to questions 
pertaining to the TEUC available to certain displaced airline and 
airline related workers.

    Dated: June 5, 2003.
Emily Stover DeRocco,
Assistant Secretary.

Employment and Training Administration Advisory System

U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, DC 20210

Classification: OWS
Correspondence Symbol: DUIO
Date: April 25, 2003

Advisory: Unemployment Insurance Program Letter No. 30-02, Change 2.
To: All State Workforce Agencies.
From: Cheryl Atkinson s/s, Administrator, Office of Workforce 
Security.
Subject: Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation (TEUC) Act of 
2002--Additional TEUC for Displaced Airline and Related Workers.

    1. Purpose. To provide State Workforce Agencies (SWAs) 
instructions for implementing the changes to the TEUC program 
related to displaced airline and related workers.
    2. References. Title II of the Job Creation and Worker 
Assistance Act of 2002 (The Temporary Extended Unemployment 
Compensation Act of 2002), Public Law 107-147; Public Law 108-1; 
UIPL No. 30-02 dated July 5, 2002; UIPL No. 30-02, Change 1, dated 
January 9, 2003; Section 4002 of Public Law 108-11, signed by the 
President on April 16, 2003; Section 205 of the Federal-State 
Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970, as amended; Section 
233 of the Trade Act of 1974; 20 CFR Part 615; ET Handbook No. 401; 
ET Handbook No. 410.
    3. Summary. Section 4002 of P.L. 108-11 creates special rules 
for determining TEUC eligibility for certain displaced airline and 
related workers, who were separated for one of the specified reasons 
from a qualifying base period employer on or after September 11, 
2001. In brief, such workers will qualify for up to 39 weeks of 
basic TEUC (henceforth ``TEUC-A''), plus up to 13 weeks of TEUC-X 
(henceforth ``TEUC-AX''). TEUC-A is payable for weeks of 
unemployment beginning with the first week beginning after April 16, 
2003, through the week ending no later than December 28, 2003. 
Individuals with TEUC-A or TEUC-AX balances remaining on December 
28, 2003, can claim those balances during the transition period 
which ends with the last week that begins on or before December 26, 
2004. TEUC-A claims cannot be augmented with TEUC-AX (that is, TEUC-
AX entitlement cannot be established) during the transition period.

Rescissions: None
Expiration Date: Continuing

    4. Summary of the New Provisions. For weeks of unemployment 
beginning after April 16, 2003, the new provisions (see Attachment A 
to this UIPL) do the following for displaced airline and related 
workers:
    a. Prescribes that TEUC-A is payable and monetary determinations 
and redeterminations may be effective through the last week ending 
before December 29, 2003;
    b. Prescribes a basic TEUC-A benefit amount that is the lesser 
of 150 percent of the maximum benefit amount (MBA) of regular 
benefits of the parent claim or 39 times the individual's average 
weekly benefit amount (AWBA);
    c. Provides a TEUC-AX augmentation of \1/3\ of the basic TEUC-A 
MBA for ``eligible individuals.''
    d. Provides a transition period during which benefits may be 
paid to each eligible individual who has ``an amount remaining'' in 
his/her TEUC-A or AX account as of December 28, 2003. The transition 
period ends with the last week beginning on or before December 26, 
2004.
    5. Interpretation. SWAs are required to continue to follow the 
Department of Labor's interpretation of the TEUC Act and the 
operating instructions previously published in UIPL No. 30-02, and 
UIPL No. 30-02, Change 1, to guide states in administering the TEUC 
program, except as changed by this advisory with respect to the 
determination of eligibility for ``eligible individuals'' as defined 
in Section 4002(a)(1) of Public Law 108-11.
    These instructions are issued to the states and cooperating 
state agencies as guidance provided by the Department in its role as 
the principal in the TEUC program. As agents of the United States, 
the states and cooperating state agencies may not vary from the 
operating instructions without the prior approval of the Department. 
The interpretations and procedures issued in this document are in 
addition to those previously issued as UIPL No. 30-02, and UIPL No. 
30-02, Change 1, and apply only with respect to the TEUC 
determination in accordance with the provisions of Public Law 108-
11.
    6. TEUC Agreements. TEUC, including TEUC-A, is administered 
through voluntary agreements between states and the Department of 
Labor. All states have agreements with the Secretary to administer 
the TEUC program under provisions of the TEUC Act. The existing 
agreements remain in effect, and no new agreements are necessary.
    7. Notifications.
    a. Identification and Notification of Potentially Eligible 
Claimants. Implementation of the requirements of Section 4002, 
Public Law 108-11, requires identification of each potentially 
``eligible individual,'' including each interstate claimant. To 
satisfy this requirement, SWAs must send written notification to 
each individual who was laid-off from a base period employer on or 
after September 11, 2001. SWAs must send immediate written 
notification to each such individual who has exhausted all available 
TEUC benefits from the beginning of the TEUC program. (SWAs are not 
required to contact individuals whose separation was not due to a 
lay-off. As discussed in item 8.b. below, these individuals are not 
eligible for TEUC-A.) We provide the following draft notice:

Notice

    Additional benefits are now available under the Temporary 
Emergency Unemployment Compensation program for unemployed airline 
and related workers.
    If you are currently unemployed, you should contact us if you 
worked in an airline or related industry and you believe that you 
lost your job with a base period employer, at least partially, as a 
result of terrorist actions of September 11, 2001, as a result of 
security responses to these attacks or the closing of an airport, or 
as a result of the military conflict in Iraq.
    Airline and related industries are: air carriers, businesses 
operating at an airport, businesses that perform additional, value-
added production processes for air carriers or businesses providing 
products, supplies and services that are received or utilized by an 
airline.

To distribute the workload associated with making TEUC-A nonmonetary

[[Page 35430]]

determinations and resulting monetary redeterminations, SWAs should 
consider staggering notifications to such individuals who are in 
current TEUC or TEUC-X benefit status, allowing sufficient time to 
determine whether or not the claimant is an ``eligible individual'' 
for TEUC-A purposes prior to exhaustion. The notification of 
claimants that are currently in regular, additional, or extended 
benefit (EB) status (under the permanent EB program) can be 
accomplished as a notice included with a TEUC monetary 
determination.
    b. Notification of Media. To assure public knowledge of this 
special extension of the TEUC program for airline and related 
workers, the SWA must notify appropriate news media having coverage 
throughout the state and provide appropriate information on its 
website.
    8. Qualifying Base Period Employment. Establishing base period 
employment as ``qualifying employment'' for TEUC-A purposes is 
three-fold. First, the employment must have occurred ``in whole or 
in part'' during the base period of the ``applicable benefit year'' 
for the TEUC-A claim. Second, the employment must be with the type 
of employer(s) or at the location specified below. Third, the 
separation from such employment, which may have occurred during the 
base period or later, must be ``in whole or in part'' due to a 
qualifying reason specified in `b' below.
    a. Qualifying Employment. To satisfy the requirement for 
``qualifying employment,'' some base period employment must be with 
the type of employer(s) or at the location specified as follows:
    (1) Air Carriers. Air carriers for purposes of TEUC-A are 
limited to those that hold a certificate issued under chapter 411 of 
title 49, United States Code, by the Federal Aviation Administration 
of the U.S. Department of Transportation. Certificates issued under 
this chapter include those issued for charter air carriers and all-
cargo air carriers. Attachment C provides a listing of all such 
carriers.
    (2) At a facility at an airport. A ``facility at an airport'' 
includes any employer that is physically located on the grounds of 
an airport such as:
    [sbull] Retail food facilities such as restaurants, bars, fast-
food shops, and popcorn stands.
    [sbull] Other retail facilities such as gift shops, newsstands, 
clothing stores, and kiosks.
    [sbull] Hotels located on the airport grounds.
    [sbull] Aircraft maintenance and service facilities.
    [sbull] Parking facilities.
    [sbull] Car rental facilities.
    [sbull] Any other business physically located on the airport 
grounds, regardless of its business activities.

    A ``facility at an airport'' also includes any airline related 
business which, although offsite, provides functions that are 
integrally related to the operation of the airport. These include 
airport parking on privately owned land, car rental services, or 
aircraft maintenance and service facilities. Employment with the 
same employer at a facility that does not meet this definition of 
``facility at an airport'' is not ``qualifying employment'' for 
purposes of TEUC-A.
    (3) Supplier for an Air Carrier. A ``supplier'' is an employer 
that produces component parts for, or articles and contract services 
considered to be a part of the production process or services for, 
an air carrier or for another supplier or upstream producer whose 
supplies, products or services are received or utilized by an air 
carrier and used for airline industry purposes.

    Example 1: A catering service that supplies an air carrier with 
food purchased from another firm is a supplier. The firm from which 
the food is purchased is also a supplier because it is supplying 
products to a supplier that are received by an air carrier.
    Example 2: An employer manufactures commercial aircraft for air 
carriers and private aircraft for individuals and non-airline 
corporations. As a result of the terrorist action, the employer 
suffers a loss of business in its private aircraft business. It 
loses no sales to air carriers. The employer separates some workers, 
including those who manufactured commercial aircraft, because of the 
lost revenues. Even though the employer supplies air carriers and 
even though workers who worked on those supplies were separated, the 
separated workers are not eligible for TEUC-A because there is no 
loss in air carrier-related business.
    Example 3: A janitorial company provides services for an 
aircraft manufacturer. It does not provide services to an air 
carrier. Due to a loss in air carrier business, the aircraft 
manufacturer no longer has a need for these janitorial services. As 
a result, the janitorial company separates several workers. Even 
though these workers were separated due to a loss of business by the 
aircraft manufacturer that could be traced back to the air carrier, 
they are not eligible for TEUC-A because they did not supply any 
item or service which was used or received by an air carrier. For 
eligibility, services must always extend to an air carrier.
    Example 4: An accounting firm provides accounting services for a 
caterer to an air carrier. The air carrier goes out of business 
because of the terrorist action. The caterer closes because the air 
carrier was its sole customer. The caterer's closing causes the 
accounting firm to separate one of its employees who provided 
services for the caterer. That individual does not have ``qualifying 
employment'' because the accounting firm is not a ``supplier'' 
within the meaning of the statute. The accounting firm's service to 
the caterer did not extend to the air carrier.

    (4) Upstream Producer for an Air Carrier. An ``upstream 
producer'' is an employer that ``performs additional, value-added, 
production processes, including firms that perform final assembly, 
finishing, or packaging of articles, for another firm.''
    We are not providing an example of an ``upstream producer'' 
because the definition of supplier appears to cover all entities 
eligible under the two definitions.
    b. Qualifying Separations. To be in qualified employment the 
separation from base period employment must be due--in whole or in 
part--to one or more of the following reasons:
    [sbull] Reductions in service by an air carrier as a result of 
the terrorist actions on September 11, 2001, or a security measure 
taken in response to such actions.
    [sbull] A closure of an airport in the United States as a result 
of the terrorist actions on September 11, 2001, or a security 
measure taken in response to such actions.
    [sbull] The military conflict with Iraq.

    The separation from ``qualifying employment'' that establishes a 
claimant as an ``eligible individual'' may occur during the base 
period or lag period and does not have to be the most recent 
separation when the ``applicable benefit year'' was established.
    A separation from lag period only employment with a qualified 
employer does not establish an individual as an ``eligible 
individual.'' Also, any separation from a qualified employer due to 
a voluntary quit or discharge for any reason is not a separation for 
a qualifying reason; the separation must be a ``lack-of-work'' 
separation due to one or more of the reasons stated above.
    c. Determining Whether a Claimant Has ``Qualifying Employment'' 
and is an ``Eligible Individual''. To determine if a claimant is an 
``eligible individual'' for TEUC-A purposes, SWAs must determine if 
the claimant has ``qualifying employment'' during the base period of 
the ``applicable benefit year'' that was used in the monetary 
determination for regular benefits. In making this determination, 
SWAs will follow their usual fact-finding procedures. This will 
require the SWA to contact employers to determine if the employment 
was of the type, or performed at the location, specified above, and 
if the reason for separation was one of the reasons specified above. 
We have attached a sample form that SWAs may elect to use for this 
purpose. SWAs may use an altered design as long as the required 
information is solicited from the employer. Where, after reasonable 
efforts to obtain information from the employer, the SWA does not 
have sufficient information to make a determination, then SWAs 
should evaluate the claimant's statement and follow standard 
procedures for issuing nonmonetary determinations. SWAs will be 
expected to preserve all documents relating to the determination for 
audit purposes.
    In the case of larger employers, it may be evident that the 
employer is an air carrier (based on the attached listing), another 
type of easily identifiable large employer, or a facility located at 
an airport; it will not be necessary to verify the nature of the 
base period employment in such cases. As a result, when such an 
employer is identified, SWAs are encouraged, in lieu of sending a 
form for each claimant, to contact the employer as soon as possible 
to obtain a listing of all individuals laid-off, in whole or in 
part, due to the reasons described above.
    If the SWA determines that the claimant is not an ``eligible 
individual'' for TEUC-A purposes, an appealable nonmonetary 
determination must be issued.
    9. Calculating Entitlement to TEUC-A and TEUC-AX. Once an 
individual has been identified as an ``eligible individual'' 
qualifying for TEUC-A, the SWA will issue a monetary determination 
(or redetermination as the case may be) establishing TEUC-A 
eligibility. Any TEUC-

[[Page 35431]]

A balance will be payable only for weeks of unemployment beginning 
after April 16, 2003.
    a. TEUC-A Entitlement. TEUC-A entitlement will equal the lesser 
of 150 percent of the MBA of regular benefits payable to the 
individual during the benefit year or 39 times the individual's AWBA 
payable during the benefit year for a week of total unemployment. If 
the state includes dependents' allowances in the calculation of the 
weekly benefit amount (WBA) for regular benefits, the same rule 
applies to the calculation of TEUC benefits. If the state calculates 
dependents' allowances separately from the WBA, the state will apply 
the same rule to the TEUC determination.
    If an individual has already been paid TEUC or TEUC-X, the 
available TEUC-A balance will be reduced by the amount already paid 
in TEUC or TEUC-X benefits. Any TEUC-X previously paid is converted 
to TEUC-A and the TEUC-X determination is disregarded.
    b. TEUC-AX Entitlement. The amount of TEUC-AX payable equals 
one-third of the TEUC-A entitlement. This means TEUC-AX is payable 
up to 13 times the WBA. Whether an individual qualifies for TEUC-AX 
will be determined by using the same criteria that apply to TEUC-X. 
Specifically, an individual must exhaust TEUC-A during an EB or 
TEUC-X period as authorized by the TEUC Act.
    10. Transition Payments. TEUC-A and TEUC-AX continue to be 
payable to individuals with a balance in their TEUC account as of 
December 28, 2003, during the transition period which ends with the 
last week beginning on or before December 26, 2004.
    11. Reporting TEUC-A and TEUC-AX Activity. TEUC-A and TEUC-AX 
activity is reportable under the existing TEUC reporting 
requirements for the ETA 207, ETA 218, ETA 227, ETA 539, ETA 2112, 
ETA 5130 and ETA 5159. Please note that form ETA 2112 has changed 
recently. Previously, TEUC payment totals had been reported on line 
39. The totals are now reportable on line 41. For reporting 
purposes, no separation of TEUC-A and AX from other TEUC program 
activity is required, with the following exception: States are to 
report the total number of newly qualified TEUC-A claimants 
determined during the month in the comments section of the TEUC ETA 
5159 report. This total should be the sum of new TEUC-A 
determinations for recent exhaustees (of regular, additional or 
extended benefits, as appropriate) plus the redeterminations of 
existing or previously exhausted TEUC/TEUC-X claims.
    The separate financial status report (Standard Form 269) for 
administrative grants and costs associated with the TEUC program is 
to include costs associated with this extension related to displaced 
airline and related workers (TEUC-A and TEUC-AX).
    12. Administrative Funding. The payment of TEUC-A and TEUC-AX 
will involve an increase in claims activity and one-time 
implementation costs.
    a. Claims. The UI-3 report will compile workload data from the 
TEUC versions of the ETA 5159, ETA 207, and ETA 5130. In addition, 
SWAs should enter the number of monetary redeterminations in column 
(a) of line 12, and a minutes per unit value of 05.000 in column 
(b).
    b. Implementation Supplemental Budget Requests (SBRs). SWAs may 
submit an SBR for reimbursement of TEUC-A implementation costs. SBRs 
should be limited to one-time costs for the items listed below that 
are attributable to implementation of TEUC-A:

(1) Forms and supplies (e.g., printed notices mailed to exhaustees)
(2) Computer programming
(3) Training and travel
(4) Public notices on television, radio, or in the newspapers
(5) Overhead related only to the above

Calculations for costs of SWA staff and contractors should be shown 
in accordance with the SBR instructions in ET Handbook No. 336. 
Costs for SWA staff should be included only if they are for overtime 
or if the positions were back-filled.
    13. OMB Approval. The reporting instructions for the TEUC 
program have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) under OMB Approval No. 1205-0433, expiration date December 31, 
2004. However, OMB approval is being sought for approval of the 
burden hours associated with the request for employer information 
that is necessary for determining eligibility for TEUC-A. ETA will 
notify states upon OMB approval.
    14. Action Required. Administrators are requested to provide 
this information and instructions to the appropriate staff.
    15. Inquiries. Direct questions to the appropriate regional 
office.
    16. Attachment A: Text of Section 4002, Public Law 108-11 \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Attachment A is available in the 
www.workforcesecurity.doleta.gov Web site under Directives/
Advisories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Attachment B: Questions and Answers
    Attachment C: List of Certified Air Carriers
    Attachment D: Sample Employer Notice

Attachment B to UIPL No. 30-02, Change 2--Questions and Answers

1. Administrative

    a. Question: Are new agreements between the state and the 
Department of Labor necessary for this extension?
    Answer: No. The existing agreement remains in effect.
    b. Question: What is the first week payable under this extension 
for TEUC-A?
    Answer: The first week payable is the first week which begins 
after April 16, 2003.
    c. Question: What is an ``air carrier'' for purposes of TEUC-A?
    Answer: A qualifying air carrier is ``an air carrier that holds 
a certificate issued under chapter 411 of title 49, U.S.C.'' That 
section provides that an air carrier may provide air transportation 
only if it holds a certificate issued under chapter 411. 
Certificates may be issued for charter air carriers and all-cargo 
air transportations. See Attachment C for a listing of all certified 
air carriers.
    d. Question: How will states determine if the individual has 
``qualifying employment?''
    Answer: Unlike other emergency extensions, including the basic 
TEUC program, for TEUC-A it will be necessary to verify whether at 
least one base period employer provided qualifying employment. We 
have prepared and attached a draft form that SWAs may elect to use 
in contacting employers (See Attachment D).
    The employer's failure to respond to the notice does not absolve 
the agency from the responsibility to pursue the necessary 
information to verify the qualifying employment. The claimant's 
statement may be evaluated if the employer does not respond, but the 
state must meet the same standards required for any nonmonetary 
determination as stated in the Secretary of Labor's ``Standards for 
Claim Determinations'', Part V of the Employment Security Manual. 
This includes gathering evidentiary facts rather than conclusions, 
giving the claimant a reasonable opportunity to provide information 
when requested to do so, and obtaining the information promptly so 
that benefits will not be unduly delayed.

2. Claimants Potentially Eligible for TEUC Benefits Under This 
Extension

    a. Question: What is the universe of claimants who are 
potentially eligible for TEUC-A under this extension?
    Answer: All claimants that meet the definition of ``eligible 
individual'' as defined by Public Law 108-11 and otherwise meet the 
requirements for a TEUC benefit extension.
    b. Question: Does the extended period for which TEUC-A is 
payable apply to all TEUC claims?
    Answer: No. Only TEUC-A and TEUC-AX are payable during the 
extended period ending with the last week beginning on or before 
December 26, 2004.
    c. Question: Does an individual who was separated from a 
certified air carrier prior to September 11, 2001, satisfy the 
definition of an ``eligible individual''?
    Answer: No. The definition of an ``eligible individual'' 
includes a requirement that the individual's regular benefits for 
the ``applicable benefit year'' be partially or wholly based on 
``qualifying employment.'' To be deemed ``qualifying employment,'' 
the separation from such employment must have occurred on or after 
September 11, 2001 because of: (1) reductions in service by an air 
carrier as a result of a terrorist attack on the United States on 
September 11, 2001, or security measure taken in response to such 
attack; (2) a closure of an airport in the United States as a result 
of such terrorist action or security measure; or (3) a military 
conflict with Iraq that has been authorized by Congress.
    d. Question: Does an individual who satisfies the definition of 
``eligible individual'' but who exhausted TEUC in June 2002 and is 
still unemployed potentially qualify for benefits under this 
extension?
    Answer: Yes.
    e. Question: Does an ``eligible individual'' with intervening 
employment since separation from ``qualifying employment'' who does 
not qualify for a new regular claim, based on the intervening 
employment, continue to meet the definition of an

[[Page 35432]]

``eligible individual'' for purposes of this extension?
    Answer: Yes.
    f. Question: Does an individual who is separated from an air 
carrier or from otherwise qualifying airline related employment but 
whose regular benefits were not based, in whole or in part, on such 
employment, meet the definition of an ``eligible individual'' for 
purposes of TEUC-A?
    Answer: No. To meet the definition of an ``eligible individual'' 
for purposes of TEUC-A, the claimant's regular benefits must have 
been based, in whole or in part, on ``qualifying employment.'' In 
the case described, there is no ``qualifying employment'' in the 
base period.

3. Applicable Benefit Year for Airline and Related Workers TEUC 
Extension Purposes

    a. Question: Does an individual with a prior benefit year, where 
regular benefits were based on ``qualifying employment,'' who is 
eligible for regular benefits in a subsequent benefit year have the 
option to receive TEUC-A based on the first benefit year?
    Answer: No. An individual with existing entitlement to regular 
compensation is not an exhaustee for TEUC-A purposes.

4. Monetary Eligibility

    a. Question: What is the maximum amount of TEUC-A benefits 
available to an ``eligible individual?''
    Answer: Basic TEUC-A entitlement for ``eligible individuals'' 
will be determined as the lesser of 150 percent of the MBA of 
regular benefits payable to the individual during the benefit year 
or 39 times the individual's AWBA payable during the benefit year 
for a week of total unemployment. If the state includes dependents' 
allowances in the calculation of the weekly benefit amount (WBA) for 
regular benefits, the same rule applies to the calculation of TEUC-A 
benefits. If the state calculates dependents' allowances separate 
from the WBA, the state will apply the same rule to the 
determination for TEUC-A.
    The TEUC-A account of an individual exhausting basic TEUC-A with 
payment for a week of unemployment beginning after April 16, 2003, 
and during an extended benefit (EB) period or TEUC-X period in the 
state, will be augmented by an amount equal to one-third (\1/3\) of 
the basic TEUC-A amount.
    b. Question: When an ``eligible individual'' is in current claim 
status with an existing basic TEUC or TEUC-X balance what should the 
state do?
    Answer: The SWA will issue a TEUC-A monetary redetermination to 
each ``eligible individual'' who has an existing TEUC balance, as of 
the effective date of TEUC-A, in an amount that is the lesser of 150 
percent of the regular benefit MBA or 39 times the AWBA. All TEUC 
benefits, including TEUC-X, previously paid will reduce the 
available basic TEUC-A balance available. The available balance 
attributable to the redetermination is payable for weeks of 
unemployment beginning after April 16, 2003. Any TEUC-X previously 
paid becomes basic TEUC-A payments under the redetermination.
    c. Question: When an ``eligible individual'' has exhausted basic 
TEUC prior to the effective date of this extension, what should the 
state do other than providing notification of the extension?
    Answer: When this claimant files an additional or reopened 
claim, the SWA will issue a basic TEUC-A monetary redetermination in 
an amount that is the lesser of 150 percent of the regular benefit 
MBA or 39 times the AWBA. All TEUC benefits previously paid will 
reduce the available TEUC-A balance available. The basic TEUC-A 
balance available as a result of the redetermination is payable for 
weeks of unemployment beginning after April 16, 2003.
    d. Question: When an ``eligible individual'' has exhausted TEUC-
X prior to the effective date of this extension, what should the 
state do other than providing notification of the extension?
    Answer: When this claimant files an additional or reopened 
claim, the SWA will issue a TEUC-A monetary redetermination in the 
amount of the lesser of 150 percent of the regular benefit MBA 
benefit amount or 39 times the AWBA effective for weeks of 
unemployment beginning after April 16, 2003. All basic TEUC and 
TEUC-X benefits previously paid will reduce the available TEUC-A 
balance available and are considered basic TEUC-A payments. The 
basic TEUC-A balance available as a result of the redetermination is 
payable for weeks of unemployment beginning after April 16, 2003.
    e. Question: Can TEUC-AX augmentations continue to be made 
during the transition period?
    Answer: No.
    f. Question: Can a new TEUC-A monetary determination be issued 
effective for a week ending on or after December 29, 2003?
    Answer: No.
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P

[[Page 35433]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN13JN03.000


[[Page 35434]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN13JN03.001


[[Page 35435]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN13JN03.002


[[Page 35436]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN13JN03.003


[[Page 35437]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN13JN03.004


[[Page 35438]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN13JN03.005


[[Page 35439]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN13JN03.006

BILLING CODE 4510-30-C

Employment and Training Administration Advisory System

U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, D.C. 20210

Classification: OWS
Correspondence symbol: DUIO
Date: May 7, 2003

Advisory: Unemployment Insurance Program Letter No. 30-02, Change 3.
    To: All State Workforce Agencies.

[[Page 35440]]

    From: Cheryl Atkinson s/s, Administrator, Office of Workforce 
Security.
Subject: Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation (TEUC) Act of 
2002--Additional TEUC for Displaced Airline and Related Workers.

    1. Purpose. To respond to questions concerning implementation of 
the TEUC extension for displaced airline and related workers.
    2. References. Title II of the Job Creation and Worker 
Assistance Act of 2002 (The Temporary Extended Unemployment 
Compensation Act of 2002), Public Law 107-147, signed by the 
President on March 9, 2002; Public Law 108-1, signed by the 
President on January 8, 2003; UIPL No. 30-02 dated July 5, 2002; 
UIPL No. 30-02, Change 1 dated January 9, 2003; UIPL No. 30-02, 
Change 2 dated April 25, 2003; Section 4002 of Public Law 108-11, 
signed by the President on April 16, 2003; Section 205 of the 
Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970, as 
amended; Section 233 of the Trade Act of 1974; 20 CFR Part 615; ET 
Handbook No. 401; ET Handbook No. 410.
    3. Background. This advisory continues the Department's guidance 
concerning the TEUC program extension for airline and related 
workers (hereafter referred to as TEUC-A) by answering questions 
submitted by states. The answers address specific circumstances 
consistent with the Department's interpretation of Section 4002 of 
Public Law 108-11 which creates special rules for determining 
eligibility for TEUC-A. Please note: There is a typographical error 
in Attachment A to UIPL No. 30-02, Change 2, page 3. Section (3) 
ADDITIONAL WEEKS OF BENEFITS, (B) should read as follows: ``in 
subsection (c)(1), by inserting ``\1/3\ of'' after ``equal to''.

Rescissions: None
Expiration Date: Continuing.

    The attached questions and answers are organized by category in 
order to make it easier to find questions and answers of interest.
    4. Action Required. Administrators are requested to provide this 
advisory to appropriate staff and ensure adherence to the guidance.
    5. Inquiries. Inquiries should be directed to your Regional 
Office.
    6. Attachment. Questions and Answers for Clarification of 
Section 4002 of Public Law 108-11.
    Attachment to UIPL No. 30-02, Change 3--Questions and Answers 
for Clarification of Section 4002, of Public Law 108-11

1. Administrative

    a. Question: Item 7.a. of UIPL No. 30-02, Change 2, indicates 
that ``To satisfy this requirement, State Workforce Agencies (SWAs) 
must send written notifications to each individual who was laid off 
from a base period employer on or after September 11, 2001. SWAs 
must send immediate written notification to each such individual who 
has exhausted all available TEUC benefits from the beginning of the 
TEUC program.'' Shouldn't a notice be sent to anyone laid off after 
September 11, 2001, regardless of whether he/she exhausted TEUC?
    Answer: No. If a claimant's most recent separation from each 
base period employer was prior to September 11, 2001, written notice 
is not sent because the claimant is not eligible for TEUC-A. Written 
notices must be sent to individuals who were laid off from a base 
period employer on or after September 11, 2001, and who are 
exhaustees for TEUC purposes, because whether or not they exhausted 
TEUC, they are potentially eligible for TEUC-A. The statement 
pertaining to immediate notification of TEUC exhaustees was intended 
to identify potentially eligible claimants that should be notified 
quickly because they may still be unemployed and without benefits. 
Other potentially eligible claimants that must be provided written 
notice as soon as possible are those claimants laid off by a base 
period employer after September 11, 2001, that have a remaining 
balance on their TEUC claim. These claimants are generally in 
benefit status or have returned to work and are not in need of an 
immediate TEUC-A determination in order to have benefits available.
    b. Question: For TEUC or TEUC-X exhaustees, are initial claims 
required to initiate a determination of TEUC-A eligibility?
    Answer: Yes, depending on each individual claimant's situation, 
e.g., quarter change, benefit year ending, intervening employment, 
etc. The state must follow the same procedures as apply when there 
is a break or quarter change during the TEUC claim. The state must 
determine if the claimant still meets the basic requirements for 
TEUC.
    c. Question: Must states determine if an individual has 
``qualifying employment'' prior to making any TEUC-A payments? If 
so, should they allow their standard time for employers to respond?
    Answer: Yes to both questions. Until the state has determined 
that the claimant is an ``eligible individual,'' no TEUC-A account 
may be established. However, if the claimant has not previously 
received a TEUC determination, the state must issue a TEUC 
determination and make payments pending redetermination to TEUC-A, 
if appropriate. Employers are to be given the same amount of time to 
respond to the request for information as they are normally given 
under state law.
    d. Question: If a claimant is currently in basic TEUC status, 
must the state automatically commence converting the individual to 
TEUC-A?
    Answer: No. Claims may not be automatically converted to TEUC-A. 
The state must first determine if the claimant is an ``eligible 
individual'' for TEUC-A purposes. Potentially eligible claimants 
receiving basic TEUC or TEUC-X must be advised of the TEUC-A option. 
States should advise claimants in current claim status of the TEUC-A 
option early enough to allow for the TEUC-A determination to be made 
before the claimant exhausts to prevent an interruption of payments 
to TEUC-A eligible claimants.
    e. Question: Do all base period employers need to be notified or 
just the employer that the claimant identifies as being in 
``qualifying employment?''
    Answer: In general, each base period employer from which the 
claimant was laid off on or after September 11, 2001, must be 
contacted because the state may not issue an ineligible 
determination without establishing that the claimant does not have 
``qualifying employment.'' However, in cases where the claimant 
appears on a qualified employer's list of individuals that were 
separated for one of the qualifying reasons, there is no need to 
contact other employers because the state has sufficient information 
to determine that the claimant is an ``eligible individual.''
    f. Question: An individual is about to exhaust regular benefits 
and the state is prepared to notify the individual of the TEUC 
program. Because the individual will be eligible for basic TEUC, is 
it necessary to immediately investigate the claimant's eligibility 
for TEUC-A?
    Answer: No. However, states should notify individuals of the 
TEUC-A option at the time of the TEUC initial claim in order to 
identify claims needing TEUC-A determinations. Notice of TEUC-A 
should be given no later than at the time of the issuance of the 
basic TEUC monetary determination. This notice will provide enough 
time for a TEUC-A determination before exhaustion of TEUC to avoid 
interruptions in payments to TEUC-A eligible claimants.
    Upon finding that the individual is eligible for TEUC-A, the 
state will redetermine the claim to TEUC-A and report a 
redetermination in the comments section of the ETA 5159 as a TEUC-A 
redetermination.
    g. Question: What is the last date that a new TEUC-A claim can 
be effective?
    Answer: The last week for which a TEUC-A determination can be 
effective is the week that ends prior to December 29, 2003. That is 
the week ending December 27, 2003, for all states except New York 
where it is December 28, 2003.
    h. Question: What is the last week for which TEUC-A can be paid?
    Answer: The last week a TEUC-A claim can be paid is the last 
week beginning on or before December 26, 2004. That is the week 
beginning December 26, 2004, for all states except New York where it 
is December 20, 2004.

2. Applicable Benefit Year for TEUC-A Purposes

    a. Question: If an individual has received TEUC based on a prior 
benefit year and has also received TEUC based on a subsequent 
benefit year that is redetermined to TEUC-A, must the amounts of 
TEUC previously paid for both TEUC claims be deducted to establish 
the remaining TEUC-A balance?
    Answer: No. Only the TEUC benefits paid based on the same 
benefit year as the TEUC-A claim are deductible.
    b. Question: An individual who has a TEUC-A claim is determined 
eligible for regular benefits for a new benefit year. Upon 
exhaustion of the regular benefits based on the new benefit year, 
may the claimant elect to receive TEUC-A based on the prior claim 
instead of the most recent benefit year?
    Answer: No. The determination of TEUC-A eligibility must be 
based on the ``applicable benefit year,'' which in the scenario 
cited above is the most recent

[[Page 35441]]

benefit year. Also, whether or not the claimant is an ``eligible 
individual'' for TEUC-A purposes must be based on the base period 
employment for the ``applicable benefit year'' and the associated 
separation(s).

3. Monetary Eligibility

    a. Question: An individual has two base period employers. 
Employment with one employer is ``qualifying employment,'' while 
employment with the other is not. Which employment is the 
individual's monetary eligibility based on?
    Answer: The TEUC-A monetary calculation formula uses other 
factors and is not based on the amount of the base period wages from 
``qualifying employment.'' TEUC-A monetary entitlement is based on 
the calculation of the lesser of 150 percent of the regular benefit 
maximum benefit amount (MBA) or 39 times the average weekly benefit 
amount (AWBA).
    b. Question: TEUC-A benefits are applicable only to weeks 
beginning on or after the date of enactment, but all TEUC and TEUC-X 
benefits previously paid are to be deducted from the TEUC-A 
calculated MBA to create the TEUC-A account balance. Some TEUC and/
or TEUC-X weeks claimed prior to enactment of Public Law 108-11 may 
not be paid until after the TEUC-A account balance has been 
established. May these weeks be paid from the balance available in 
the TEUC-A account?
    Answer: Yes. The amount paid for all TEUC and TEUC-X compensable 
weeks is deductible from the redetermined TEUC-A MBA. When the 
payments are issued is immaterial. However, the MBA payable as TEUC 
and TEUC-X for weeks of unemployment ending prior to April 16, 2003, 
may not exceed the original TEUC amount of the lesser of 50 percent 
of the MBA or 13 times the AWBA, plus an additional amount up to 13 
times the AWBA in high unemployment states. Therefore, after the 
TEUC-A determination is made, if there are weeks of unemployment 
prior to the first week beginning after April 16, 2003, for which 
the claimant is determined eligible, payments can be made but only 
up to the MBA payable for TEUC (and TEUC-X, if applicable).
    c. Question: The claimant has exhausted TEUC in a state that has 
not been and is not in an extended benefit (EB) or TEUC-X period. 
What is the MBA payable based on a TEUC-A determination?
    Answer: The TEUC-A monetary determination is calculated at the 
lesser of 150 percent of the MBA of the regular claim or 39 times 
the AWBA minus the TEUC previously paid based on the ``applicable 
benefit year,'' creating a TEUC-A balance payable of up to 26 times 
the AWBA. If the claimant exhausts TEUC-A while the state is in an 
EB or TEUC-X period, the claimant's account will be augmented by an 
amount equal to \1/3\ of the TEUC-A MBA, thereby creating a TEUC-AX 
balance.
    d. Question: The claimant has exhausted TEUC and TEUC-X in a 
state that is currently not in an EB or TEUC-X period. What is the 
MBA payable based on a TEUC-A determination?
    Answer: The TEUC-A monetary is calculated at the lesser of 150 
percent of the MBA of the regular claim or 39 times the AWBA minus 
the TEUC and TEUC-X previously paid based on the ``applicable 
benefit year,'' creating a balance payable of up to 13 times the 
AWBA. If the claimant exhausts TEUC-A while the state is in an EB or 
TEUC-X period, the claimant's account will be augmented by an amount 
equal to \1/3\ of the TEUC-A MBA, thereby creating a TEUC-X balance.
    e. Question: The claimant has exhausted TEUC and TEUC-X in a 
state that is currently in an extended benefit or TEUC-X period. 
What is the MBA payable based on a TEUC-A determination?
    Answer: The TEUC-A monetary determination is calculated at the 
lesser of 150 percent of the MBA of the regular claim or 39 times 
the AWBA minus the TEUC and TEUC-X previously paid based on the 
``applicable benefit year,'' creating a TEUC-A balance of up to 13 
times the AWBA. If the claimant exhausts TEUC-A after the state's EB 
or TEUC-X period has triggered ``off,'' no additional TEUC-A 
benefits are payable. If the claimant exhausts while the state is in 
an EB or TEUC-X period, the claimant's account will be augmented by 
an amount equal to 1/3 of the TEUC-A MBA, thereby creating a TEUC-X 
balance.

4. Base Period Twenty--Weeks of Work Requirement

    a. Question: To be eligible for TEUC-A, must the individual's 
``qualifying employment'' in the base period meet the 20 weeks of 
full-time work or the equivalent in insured wages requirement?
    Answer: No. The claimant's total base period employment and 
wages must meet the ``20 weeks of work'' requirement.

5. Determining if an Individual Is an ``Eligible Individual'' for 
TEUC-A Purposes

    a. Question: The individual had ``qualifying employment'' during 
the base period of the prior benefit year. The new benefit year has 
no ``qualifying employment.'' Is this individual an ``eligible 
individual?''
    Answer: No. For purposes of determining TEUC, and therefore 
TEUC-A eligibility, the ``applicable benefit year'' is the current 
or most recent benefit year. (See UIPL No. 30-02, pages II-1 and 
III-2.)
    b. Question: The state has completed its TEUC-A fact-finding and 
is ready to issue a determination. What type of determination should 
be issued?
    Answer: If the state determines an individual is eligible for 
TEUC-A, the state will issue or document an eligible nonmonetary 
determination and issue a TEUC-A monetary determination or 
redetermination, as appropriate. If the state determines an 
individual is ineligible for TEUC-A, the state will issue an 
ineligible nonmonetary determination only. In either case, the 
nonmonetary determination is reportable under ``Miscellaneous'' on 
the TEUC ETA 207 report.
    c. Question: The individual had no ``qualifying employment'' in 
the base period, but did have ``qualifying employment'' in the lag 
period. Is this individual an ``eligible individual?'
    Answer: No. In order for a claimant to be determined an 
``eligible individual'' for TEUC-A purposes, ``qualifying 
employment'' must have been used in the determination of regular 
compensation for the ``applicable benefit year.''
    d. Question: Do claimants have appeal rights if determined not 
eligible for TEUC-A?
    Answer: Yes. States must provide the same appeal rights provided 
for determinations for regular benefits.
    e. Question: Is a monetary determination notice sufficient to 
advise claimants they are not eligible for TEUC-A?
    Answer: No. An appealable nonmonetary determination is required 
if a claimant is determined ineligible for TEUC-A.
    f. Question: Since employers are being contacted to determine 
``qualifying employment,'' are they interested parties to the 
determination?
    Answer: No. Employers are not interested parties because their 
accounts are not potentially chargeable for TEUC-A.
    g. Question: After issuing an eligible determination, the state 
receives late information from an employer that contradicts the 
claimant's statement. Is the state required to issue a 
redetermination or does the state follow its regular procedures?
    Answer: Late information received from the employer must be 
considered. If it supports a denial of benefits, a redetermination 
must be issued. This procedure may differ from state law provisions 
prohibiting the use of information received after a decision has 
been issued. Such state provisions are intended to penalize an 
employer who has not complied with state law provisions concerning 
employer response. However, the employer is not an interested party 
to a TEUC-A determination and these state provisions must not be 
applied.

6. Determining if the Employment is ``Qualifying Employment''

    a. Question: Qualifying separations include those due to 
``military conflict with Iraq.'' Must separations due to the 
``military conflict with Iraq'' be related to employment with a 
certified air carrier, employment at a facility at an airport, or 
employment with an upstream producer or supplier for an air carrier?
    Answer: Yes. The separation has to be from employment with a 
certified air carrier, employment at a facility at an airport, or 
employment with an upstream producer or supplier for a certified air 
carrier. A separation due ``in whole or in part'' to the military 
conflict with Iraq is a qualifying separation for purposes of 
establishing ``qualifying employment.''
    b. Question: Eight thousand servicemembers from a local military 
base were sent to Iraq. Are the local businesses that have suffered 
a loss of business due to the deployment considered to have provided 
``qualifying employment'' or is that designation limited to airline-
related employment?
    Answer: The designation ``qualifying employment'' is limited to 
airline-related employment from which the individual was

[[Page 35442]]

separated for a qualifying reason. Therefore, employment with a non-
airline related employers who have suffered a loss of business due 
to the deployment of large number of military servicemembers from 
the community is not ``qualifying employment.''
    c. Question: If the claimant's regular benefit entitlement is 
determined using an alternate base period, are the normally lag 
period wages that are used in the determination ``qualifying 
employment'' if all other conditions are met?
    Answer: Yes. If regular entitlement is determined using the 
alternate base period, that is the base period for purposes of 
determining ``qualifying employment.''
    d. Question: During the base period, the claimant was employed 
with an air carrier and was separated for a nonqualifying reason. 
Subsequent to establishing the ``applicable benefit year,'' the 
claimant returned to work with that employer and was separated for a 
qualifying reason. Would this separation establish the base period 
employment as ``qualifying employment?'
    Answer: Yes. The qualifying separation does not have to occur 
during the base period. In most cases it will probably occur during 
the lag period.
    e. Question: The term ``qualifying employment'' as expressed in 
the law provides that separation from the employment must be due 
``in whole or in part'' to one of three conditions. Is it possible 
that an individual can have employment with more than one base 
period employer that can be considered qualifying employment?
    Answer: Yes.
    f. Question: There are several hotels ``offsite'' along the main 
road of the airport. Would these hotels qualify as hotels at the 
facility?
    Answer: No. Employment with a hotel that is not physically 
located on the grounds of the airport and that does not provide 
functions that are integrally related to the operation of the 
airport, is not ``employment at a facility at an airport.'' A 
``facility at an airport'' includes any facility that is physically 
located on the grounds of an airport or those offsite businesses/
facilities that provide functions that are integrally related to the 
operation of the airport. An offsite hotel may be convenient, but it 
is not ``integrally related to the operation of the airport.''
    g. Question: A hotel located offsite near an airport had a 
contract with a certified air carrier to supply a certain number of 
rooms each night for airline personnel. Due to a reduction in the 
air carrier's flights, the contract with the hotel was canceled. 
Does the hotel meet the definition of a ``supplier'' for TEUC-A 
purposes?
    Answer: Yes. This hotel is a ``supplier'' that provided services 
to a certified air carrier.
    h. Question: An individual worked as a security screener at an 
airport. In response to the terrorist actions of September 11, 2001, 
this function was transferred to the newly created federal 
Transportation Security Administration (TSA). The individual was not 
hired by the TSA and is, as a result, now unemployed. Is this a 
qualifying reason for separation for TEUC-A purposes?
    Answer: No. The above individual worked at a facility at an 
airport and was separated from employment due to a security measure 
taken in response to the terrorist actions of September 11, 2001. 
However, to have ``qualifying employment,'' the individual must have 
been separated because of reductions in service by an air carrier or 
the closure of an airport in the United States. This did not occur 
under the scenario described. Rather, the individual was separated 
because the TSA took over security at the airport.
    i. Question: The claimant has a qualifying employer during the 
base period and a qualifying separation from that employer. The 
claimant is subsequently reemployed by the employer and has a 
disqualifying separation. Is this claimant's first separation from 
this employer a qualifying separation for TEUC-A purposes?
    Answer: No. The definition of an ``eligible individual'' 
requires the individual to be separated from ``qualifying 
employment.'' The determination that base period employment 
constitutes ``qualifying employment'' includes a determination that 
the claimant was separated from the base period employment for a 
qualifying reason. In this case, although this claimant was 
separated after September 11, 2001, for a qualifying reason, when 
the employer recalled the claimant, the claimant was no longer 
separated from this employer. The claimant's subsequent separation 
from this base period employer is not for one of the three 
qualifying reasons.
    j. Question: The claimant has base period employment with two 
potentially qualifying employers. One employer laid the individual 
off after September 11, 2001, for a qualifying reason; the other 
employer fired the claimant after September 11, 2001, for gross 
misconduct. Does this claimant have a qualifying separation, and is 
he/she eligible for TEUC-A?
    Answer: Whether this claimant is ``eligible'' to receive TEUC-A 
depends on whether he/she has requalified if there was a misconduct 
disqualification. However, this claimant has ``qualifying 
employment'' and meets the definition of ``eligible individual'' for 
TEUC-A monetary determination purposes because he/she is separated 
from a base period employment for a qualifying reason. This 
situation is different from the individual with two separations from 
the same employer in that the non-qualifying separation from one 
base period employer does not nullify the qualifying separation from 
another base period employer. The issue is not whether the 
claimant's separation from his/her most recent potentially 
qualifying employment is qualifying, it is whether the claimant has 
``qualifying employment,'' and this claimant does. However, to 
receive TEUC-A benefits, the individual must still meet all other 
eligibility requirements. Therefore, if the claimant has been 
disqualified, no TEUC-A is payable until the claimant has 
requalified.
    k. Question: The claimant worked at an airport construction site 
building a parking ramp or remodeling a building. Would this 
employment be considered ``employment at a facility at an airport?''
    Answer: Yes. Although the employer's office may have been 
located offsite, the claimant's employment at the construction site 
on the airport grounds constitutes ``employment at a facility at an 
airport.'' However, in order for the claimant to be an ``eligible 
individual,'' he/she must have been laid off from work at the 
airport construction site for one of the three qualifying reasons.
    l. Question: Is a company that makes and supplies parts to an 
aircraft manufacturer that sells airplanes to a certified air 
carrier a ``supplier'' for purposes of TEUC-A?
    Answer: Yes, because the air carrier is certified. However, to 
satisfy the definition of ``qualifying employment,'' the separation 
from the base period employment must be for a qualifying reason.
    m. Question: Is a company that is contracted to install phones 
or computer equipment at an airport considered a ``supplier'' for an 
air carrier?
    Answer: Yes, if the contract is with a certified air carrier. 
Also, the individual(s) installing the equipment on the airport 
grounds is performing services ``at a facility at an airport.'' 
Therefore, the employment satisfies the definition of ``qualifying 
employment'' if the separation was for one of the three qualifying 
reasons.
    n. Question: A foreign air carrier has suffered a loss in 
business associated with the terrorist actions of September 11, 
2001, and has laid off workers at airports throughout the United 
States. Does this employer meet the definition of an ``air carrier'' 
for purposes of TEUC-A?
    Answer: No. An ``air carrier'' for purposes of TEUC-A is defined 
as ``an air carrier that holds a certificate issued under chapter 
411 of title 49, United States Code.'' We have been advised by the 
Federal Aviation Administration that foreign air carriers are not 
issued such certificates. However, if this employer is located at an 
airport, then services performed for it at the airport represent 
``employment at a facility at the airport.'' To qualify, however, 
the individual must have a qualifying separation. Because the 
reduction in service was not by a certified air carrier, the layoff 
must be due to one of the other two qualifying reasons, i.e., due to 
an airport closure as a result of the terrorist actions of September 
11, 2001, or due to the military conflict in Iraq.
    o. Question: Due to a drop in business after the terrorist 
actions of September 11, 2001, a foreign air carrier cancels its 
contract with the local caterer whose sole contract was with this 
air carrier. The caterer goes out of business, laying off all of its 
workers. Does the caterer meet the definition of an ``upstream 
producer'' or ``supplier'' for TEUC-A purposes?
    Answer: No. The caterer does not meet the definition of 
``supplier'' because the products and services were not provided to 
a qualifying ``air carrier'' as defined in section 4002(a)(3) of 
Public Law 108-11.
    p. Question: A manufacturer or supplier of private aircraft 
exclusively to individuals and non-airline related businesses laid 
off workers after the terrorist actions on September 11, 2001, when 
sales of the private aircraft were reduced. Does this constitute 
``qualifying employment'' for purposes of TEUC-A?

[[Page 35443]]

    Answer: No. Section 4002(a)(3) of Public Law 108-11 is clear in 
its definition of an ``air carrier'' for purposes of TEUC-A. 
Therefore, if the reduction in business is not due to reduction in 
service by a certified air carrier, the employment does not meet the 
definition of ``qualifying employment.''
    q. Question: The TSA announced that later this year it will cut 
11% of the security screeners at the nation's airports. Does this 
employment at airports with the TSA constitute ``qualifying 
employment'' for TEUC-A purposes?
    Answer: No. These layoffs are not due to a qualifying reason for 
separation, i.e., layoffs due to a reduction in service by the 
certified air carrier due to the September 11, 2001, terrorist 
actions or security measures taken in response thereto; closure of 
an airport for that reason; or the military conflict with Iraq.
    r. Question: The meaning of the term ``qualifying employment'' 
includes ``employment at a facility at an airport.'' What is an 
airport?
    Answer: Title 49, Section 40102(g) of the United States Code 
defines ``airport'' as ``a landing area used regularly by aircraft 
for receiving or discharging passengers or cargo.''

7. Determining if the Separation Is a Qualifying Separation

    a. Question: The claimant worked in employment with a supplier 
of services utilized by a certified air carrier and was disqualified 
for a voluntary quit at the time the benefit year was established. 
On appeal, the determination was reversed because the employer 
failed to appear and the claimant maintained that the separation was 
due to a lay-off for lack of work. The claimant has now filed for 
TEUC-A and the employer has responded to the TEUC-A request for 
information stating that the claimant was not separated for a 
qualifying reason. How is this determination handled?
    Answer: Determining whether or not the claimant's separation was 
for a qualifying reason for TEUC-A purposes is not the issue that 
was previously determined. Here, the appellate body found that the 
lay-off was for lack of work. The state need only determine for 
TEUC-A qualifying purposes if the lack of work was for a qualifying 
reason. A determination that the claimant was not laid off for one 
of the TEUC-A qualifying reasons does not contradict the appellate 
decision.
    b. Question: States are required to determine if the claimant is 
an ``eligible individual'' for TEUC-A purposes. Making this 
determination involves determining if the claimant's base period 
employment used in the monetary determination for regular benefits 
meets the definition of ``qualifying employment'' which includes a 
determination of whether or not the claimant was separated for a 
qualifying reason. What section of law does the state cite in its 
nonmonetary determination and where are these determinations 
reported on the TEUC ETA 207?
    Answer: The state should cite Section 4002(a) of Public Law 108-
11. The nonmonetary determination is reportable as ``Miscellaneous'' 
in column 17, line 202 of the ETA 207 TEUC report. (See Items 14.c. 
and d.)
    c. Question: Information provided by the employer indicates that 
the employment is ``qualifying employment,'' but the state has 
reason to doubt the accuracy of this information. Is the state 
required to accept the employer's statement?
    Answer: No. However, the state must have credible information to 
refute the employer's assertion and to support a determination of 
TEUC-A ineligibility.
    d. Question: State National Guard and Air National Guard members 
were activated by the state and deployed to guard the airports. Does 
their deactivation constitute a ``qualifying separation'' for TEUC-A 
purposes?
    Answer: No. The deactivation of the State National Guard and Air 
National Guard was not due to a qualifying reason for separation, 
i.e., layoffs due to a reduction in service by the certified air 
carrier due to the September 11 terrorist actions or security 
measures taken in response thereto; closure of an airport for the 
same reason(s); or the military conflict with Iraq.
    e. Question: State National Guard and Air National Guard members 
were activated and deployed by the federal government during the 
military conflict with Iraq. Does their deactivation constitute a 
qualifying separation for TEUC-A purposes?
    Answer: No. The federal government cannot be construed as a 
certified air carrier, a facility at an airport, or a supplier to a 
certified air carrier. Nor is the federal government a ``firm.'' 
These are the terms used in the TEUC-A provisions to describe the 
employer or type of employment that potentially constitute 
``qualifying employment.'' Because military service to the 
government is not potentially ``qualifying employment,'' the reason 
for separation is not a potentially qualifying separation.
    f. Question: Military reservists were activated and deployed due 
to the military conflict with Iraq. When they are unable to return 
to their previous employment with an air carrier, employment at a 
facility at an airport, or with an upstream producer or supplier for 
an air carrier for one of the qualifying reasons for separation, are 
they considered to be separated from ``qualifying employment'' for 
TEUC-A purposes?
    Answer: Yes. Such reservists' inability to return to their prior 
employer/employment for a reason that satisfies the requirements of 
Section 4002(a)(2)(A) of P.L. 108-11, constitutes a ``qualifying 
separation'' from that employer. If that employment was used in the 
determination of eligibility for regular benefits, it constitutes 
``qualifying employment'' for TEUC-A purposes.
    g. Question: Would individuals who worked as travel agents or 
reservation agents who in whole or in part book passengers for 
certified air carrier flights be considered as ``suppliers'' or 
employees of ``suppliers'' for TEUC-A purposes?
    Answer: Yes. Travel and reservation agents/agencies perform 
written or implied contract services for certified air carriers by 
booking passengers' flights. If travel agents did not book the 
certified air carrier's flights, the certified air carriers 
themselves would be required to book the flights. Thus, these agents 
supply services to certified air carriers. If their separation is 
for a qualifying reason, they have ``qualifying employment.''

8. Adjudication of Issues Arising Subsequent to ``Qualifying 
Employment''

    a. Question: An ``eligible individual'' has had subsequent 
employment since the ``qualifying employment'' and is terminated 
from the subsequent employment for a disqualifying reason. Does this 
affect the individual's eligibility for TEUC-A?
    Answer: Maybe. When an individual has been determined to be an 
``eligible individual'' for TEUC-A purposes, that determination only 
means that the individual is entitled to a monetary determination 
using the formula that applies to TEUC-A. To receive TEUC-A 
benefits, the individual must still meet all other eligibility 
requirements. Therefore, if the claimant has been disqualified, no 
TEUC-A is payable until the claimant has requalified.

9. Interstate Benefits/Combined Wage/ICON Applications

    a. Question: How will ``eligible individuals'' be identified by 
the paying state if potentially ``qualifying employment'' on a 
combined-wage claim is from a transferring state?
    Answer: If the claimant responds to a notice of potential 
eligibility to TEUC-A, the request for information will be sent 
directly to the employer in the other state. If the employer is an 
obvious ``large employer'' (such as a certified air carrier) that 
may have already provided the transferring state with information 
about the claimant, the paying state may instead arrange to check 
with the transferring state.
    b. Question: A claimant has employment in more than one state 
and has base period employment that would satisfy the definition of 
``qualifying employment.'' However, it was not used in the monetary 
determination of the regular claim because the claimant was eligible 
for the maximum benefit amount payable under the liable state's law 
without filing a combined wage claim (CWC). Does this claimant have 
``qualifying employment'' for TEUC-A purposes?
    Answer: Under the TEUC-A law, an ``eligible individual'' is one 
whose eligibility for TEUC ``is or would be based on the exhaustion 
of regular compensation under state law, entitlement to which was 
based in whole or in part on qualifying employment performed during 
such individual's base period.'' The language ``would be'' permits 
consideration of employment, for purposes of determining qualifying 
employment, that the individual chose to exclude from base period 
employment under a CWC.

10. TEUC-A Eligibility for Individual Filing From Canada

    a. Question: May individuals filing from Canada qualify for 
TEUC-A?
    Answer: Yes, if they meet the definition of an ``eligible 
individual.''

11. TEUC-A Effect on Trade Readjustment Assistance (TRA)

    a. Question: Original TEUC benefits were deducted from 
claimants' ``basic'' TRA entitlement. Is TEUC-A also deductible from 
TRA entitlement?

[[Page 35444]]

    Answer: Yes. The same rules apply.

12. Short-Time Compensation Program

    a. Question: Employers opted to participate in the state's 
short-time compensation (or worksharing program) or otherwise 
reduced workers' hours in lieu of lay offs. Would these situations 
be considered ``qualifying separations'' for TEUC-A purposes?
    Answer: Yes, if the reduction in work hours or weeks by a 
qualifying employer was caused by one of the three qualifying 
reasons.

13. TEUC-A Benefit Funding

    a. Question: Will TEUC-A be funded separately from TEUC?
    Answer: No.

14. Reporting Requirements

    a. Question: How will TEUC-A and AX claims and benefit activity 
be reported?
    Answer: See the reporting instructions in UIPL 30-02, Change 2, 
Item 11.
    b. Question: Must TEUC-A benefit activity be reported separately 
from other TEUC activity?
    Answer: No. TEUC, TEUC-X, TEUC-A and TEUC-AX are all reported 
together on the TEUC reports. However, states are to report a 
breakout in the comments section of the ETA 5159 of the number of 
TEUC-A determinations and redeterminations. See reporting 
instructions in UIPL No. 30-02, Change 2, Item 11.
    c. Question: Will nonmonetary determinations of ``eligible 
individuals'' for TEUC-A be reported on the ETA 207 as countable 
determinations?
    Answer: Yes.
    d. Question: Does the outcome of the ``eligible individual'' 
nonmonetary determination (eligible/not eligible) affect what type 
of issue is reported on the ETA TEUC-A 207 and would it be reported 
the same on all reports?
    Answer: Whether or not the claimant is an ``eligible 
individual'' is a nonseparation nonmonetary determination reportable 
in the miscellaneous column of the TEUC-A ETA 207 regardless of the 
outcome of the determination. The TEUC-A ETA 207 is the only report 
where TEUC nonmonetary determinations will be reported.
    e. Question: Is a separate SF-269 required for reporting TEUC-A 
administrative costs?
    Answer: No. There is only one TEUC program. The TEUC-A and AX 
costs are included on the SF 269 for the TEUC program.

[FR Doc. 03-14857 Filed 6-12-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P