[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 166 (Friday, August 29, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42143-42148]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-16645]
[[Page 42143]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
20 CFR Part 603
[Docket ETA-2025-0004]
RIN 1205-AC11
Federal-State Unemployment Compensation (UC) Program; Data
Availability
AGENCY: Employment and Training Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Labor (DOL or the Department) is issuing
this proposed rule to require the disclosure of confidential
Unemployment Compensation (UC) information to Federal officials for the
purposes of UC program oversight and audits. This rule will ensure that
Federal officials, including the DOL Office of Inspector General (DOL-
OIG), are able to obtain the information they need in order to ensure
proper oversight of the UC program and to identify and address fraud in
the UC program.
DATES: Comments must be received by September 29, 2025.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket No. ETA-2025-
0004 and Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) 1205-AC11, by the
following method:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Search for the above-referenced RIN, open proposed rule, and follow the
on-screen instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the
agency name and docket number for this rulemaking or ``RIN 1205-AC11.''
Please be advised that the Department will post comments received
that relate to this proposed rule to https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided. The https://www.regulations.gov website is the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal and all
comments posted there are available and accessible to the public.
Please do not submit comments containing trade secrets, confidential or
proprietary commercial or financial information, personal health
information, sensitive personally identifiable information (for
example, Social Security numbers, driver's license or State
identification numbers, passport numbers, or financial account
numbers), or other information that you do not want to be made
available to the public. Should the Department become aware of such
information, the Department reserves the right to redact or refrain
from posting sensitive information; libelous, or otherwise
inappropriate comments, including those that contain obscene, indecent,
or profane language; comments that contain threats or defamatory
statements; and comments that contain hate speech. Please note that
depending on how information is submitted, the Department may not be
able to redact the information, and instead reserves the right to
refrain from posting the information or comment in such situations.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents,
comments received, or the plain-language summary of the proposed rule
of not more than 100 words in length required by the Providing
Accountability Through Transparency Act of 2023, go to https://www.regulations.gov (search using RIN 1205-AC11 or Docket No. ETA-2025-
0004). If you need assistance to review the comments, contact the
Office of Policy Development and Research at 202-693-3700 (this is not
a toll-free number).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luke Murren, Deputy Administrator,
Office of Policy Development and Research, Employment and Training
Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW,
Room N-5641, Washington, DC 20210, Telephone: (202) 693-3700 (voice)
(this is not a toll-free number). For persons with a hearing or speech
disability who need assistance to use the telephone system, please dial
711 to access telecommunications relay services.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Title 20 CFR part 603 establishes requirements for maintaining the
confidentiality of UC information along with standards for required and
permissible disclosures of such information. The current regulation at
20 CFR 603.5(i) provides that State UC agency disclosures to Federal
officials for UC program oversight and audits are permissible. When
paragraph (i) of section 603.5 was last updated in 2006, the notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) proposed an exception to 20 CFR part 603 for
disclosures required by Federal law.\1\ The Final Rule changed the
provision proposed at 20 CFR 603.5(i) to limit it to disclosures for UC
program oversight and audits because disclosures to Federal officials
as ``required by Federal Law'' was already covered by other provisions
in the rule, including the section allowing disclosure to public
officials at 20 CFR 603.5(e). See 71 FR 56830, 56837 (Sept. 27, 2006).
The Department explained in the Final Rule that it included the
provision regarding permissible disclosures for the purpose of Federal
oversight and audits because ``the Department believe[d] it [was]
necessary to explicitly address the inapplicability of the
confidentiality requirement to any disclosure to the Federal Government
for purposes of UC program oversight and audits.'' See 71 FR 56830,
56837 (Sept. 27, 2006). The Department now proposes to revise part 603
to make these disclosures required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 69 FR 50022 (Aug. 12, 2004) (proposing Sec. 603.5(i)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As State UC operations have evolved since this regulation was first
promulgated, States have faced increased fraud incidents including
sophisticated multistate fraud schemes by organized criminals. The
COVID-19 pandemic caused a sizable increase in fraudulent activity,
costing the UC program billions of dollars according to estimates by
DOL-OIG. DOL-OIG identified $45.6 billion in potentially fraudulent
unemployment insurance (UI) benefits paid in six high-risk areas,\2\
and estimated $191 billion in UI benefits during the pandemic period
could have been paid improperly, with a significant portion
attributable to fraud.\3\ The Secretary must be able to ensure that the
UC program is administered consistent with the requirements of Federal
law. Audits and oversight of the UC program by DOL-OIG and other
Federal officials help detect fraud vulnerabilities and identify
possible solutions, which help to ensure the UC program is being
administered consistent with Federal law requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ OIG Alert Memorandum: Potentially Fraudulent Unemployment
Insurance Payments in High-Risk Areas Increased to $45.6 Billion
Report Number: 19-22-005-03-315, September 21, 2022, https://www.oig.dol.gov/public/reports/oa/2022/19-22-005-03-315.pdf.
\3\ ``The Greatest Theft of American Tax Dollars: Unchecked
Unemployment Fraud,'' Hearing, Statement for the Record of Larry D.
Turner, Inspector General, U.S. Department of Labor; House Committee
on Ways and Means, February 8, 2023, available at: https://www.oig.dol.gov/public/testimony/02082023.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department previously published a related request for
information, entitled ``Federal-State Unemployment Compensation (UC)
Program; Confidentiality and Disclosure of State UC Information,'' on
July 25, 2023 (88 FR 47829). In total, 30 commenters responded,
representing a cross-section of stakeholders including but not limited
to State UC agencies, local workforce development boards, private
[[Page 42144]]
organizations, and individuals. Question 113 of the request for
information explicitly asked about required disclosures to DOL-OIG for
purposes of UC program oversight and audit. Of the 30 commenters, two
responded specifically to this question and their comments were not
substantive.
Amending the regulation to require these disclosures will allow the
Department to continue the important work of identifying and preventing
fraud in the UC program.
II. Discussion
The Department is proposing to remove paragraph 20 CFR 603.5(i),
which permits State UC agencies to disclose confidential UC information
to Federal officials for purposes of UC program oversight and audits,
and to add a provision requiring the disclosure of confidential UC
information for purposes of UC program oversight and audits to 20 CFR
603.6, which contains required disclosures. Moving the disclosure to
Federal officials for the purposes of UC program oversight and audits
to 20 CFR 603.6 would make these disclosures a requirement under 20 CFR
part 603. The proposed rule would effectuate this change by
redesignating paragraph (c) of Sec. 603.6 as paragraph (d) and
inserting a new paragraph (c) in Sec. 603.6. The proposed rule would
also make conforming amendments to the introductory matter of Sec.
603.5 and to paragraph (b) of Sec. 603.8.
On March 20, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order (E.O.)
14243 titled ``Stopping Waste, Fraud, and Abuse by Eliminating
Information Silos,'' \4\ which required that ``the Secretary of Labor
and the Secretary's designees shall receive, to the maximum extent
consistent with law, unfettered access to all unemployment data and
related payment records. . .'' E.O. 14243, Section 3(d), 90 FR 13681
(Mar. 25, 2025). This NPRM's proposed amendment would further the
objectives of the E.O. by requiring, rather than allowing, the
disclosure of confidential UC information to Federal officials for the
purposes of UC program oversight and audits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/stopping-waste-fraud-and-abuse-by-eliminating-information-silos/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Audits and oversight of the UC program performed by Federal
officials, such as those conducted by the DOL-OIG, to identify and
address fraud, help ensure the UC program is administered consistent
with the Federal law requirements of section 303(a)(1) of the Social
Security Act (SSA). The authority for this amendment is derived from
the ``methods of administration'' requirement of section 303(a)(1),
SSA. Section 303(a)(1), SSA, requires States to provide in their laws,
as a condition to be certified to receive administrative grants, for
such ``methods of administration'' as the Secretary determines are
``reasonably calculated to insure full payment of unemployment
compensation when due.'' The Department interprets the phrase ``when
due'' in this requirement to mean accurate payments are made to
eligible claimants in addition to ensuring that the payments are
timely. It also requires that a State not make payments when payments
are not due, i.e., to individuals not eligible, due to fraud or
otherwise. Due to the increasingly sophisticated nature of the fraud
schemes perpetuated against the UC program, DOL interprets section
303(a)(1), SSA, as requiring the disclosure of confidential UC
information to Federal officials, including DOL-OIG, for the purpose of
UC program oversight and audits. Identifying and preventing fraud
activities through oversight and audits reduces improper payments of
benefits and is necessary for the proper and efficient administration
of the UC program.
Confidential UC information has been collected by DOL-OIG since
2020 in accordance with the Inspector General Act and its subpoena
authority. This collection continued in accordance with the Coronavirus
Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, as amended, to include
the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA). The temporary UC programs under
the CARES Act ended in 2021. Subsequent ARPA grants included a
condition that continued the required disclosures to DOL-OIG for UC
program oversight and audits; however, these grants were terminated in
May 2025. Since the termination of those grants, States are expected to
comply with DOL-OIG requests and continue to provide the data on a
quarterly basis. The collections occur under a System of Records Notice
(SORN) that covers such collections. See DOL-OIG 12, Office of
Inspector General Warehouse and Learning System (OWLS), 85 FR 60833
(Sept. 28, 2020).
The Department is soliciting comments from the public concerning
the proposed changes enumerated in this NPRM. Additionally, the
Department is requesting comments from the public regarding a potential
amendment to 20 CFR part 603 that would require States to submit all
claims data on a regular basis to the Employment and Training
Administration as part of a national UC claims database for the
purposes of UC program oversight and audits. Specifically, the
Department is soliciting public comments regarding this and appropriate
safeguards and security measures to protect claimant data collected
under such a requirement.
III. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review), 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), and 14192
(Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation)
E.O. 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR 51735 (Oct.
4, 1993)), requires agencies, to the extent permitted by law, to: (1)
propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that
its benefits justify its costs (recognizing that some benefits and
costs are difficult to quantify); (2) tailor regulations to impose the
least burden on society, consistent with obtaining regulatory
objectives, taking into account, among other things, and to the extent
practicable, the costs of cumulative regulations; (3) select, in
choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, those approaches that
maximize net benefits; (4) to the extent feasible, specify performance
objectives, rather than specifying the behavior or manner of compliance
that regulated entities must adopt; and (5) identify and assess
available alternatives to direct regulation, including providing
economic incentives to encourage the desired behavior, such as user
fees or marketable permits, or providing information upon which choices
can be made by the public.
Section 6(a) of E.O. 12866 also requires agencies to submit
``significant regulatory actions,'' as defined by section 3(f) of that
E.O., to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), which
is part of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). OIRA has
determined that this proposed rule is a ``significant regulatory
action'' under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866. Accordingly, this proposed
rule was submitted to OIRA for review. E.O. 13563 directs agencies to
propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that
its benefits justify its costs; it is tailored to impose the least
burden on society, consistent with achieving the regulatory objectives;
and in choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, the agency has
[[Page 42145]]
selected those approaches that maximize net benefits.
E.O. 14192, titled ``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation,''
was issued on January 31, 2025. This rule, if finalized as proposed, is
not expected to be an E.O. 14192 regulatory action, pursuant to section
3(b) of E.O. 14243, ``Stopping Waste, Fraud, and Abuse by Eliminating
Information Silos.''
1. Statement of Need
The Department proposes to amend 20 CFR part 603 to require, rather
than permit, the disclosure of confidential UC information to Federal
officials for the purposes of UC program oversight and audits. Since
this regulation was first promulgated, and as State UC operations have
evolved, States have faced increased fraud incidents including
sophisticated multistate fraud schemes by organized criminals. During
the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a sizable increase in fraudulent
activity costing the UC program billions of dollars according to
estimates by DOL-OIG. DOL-OIG identified $45.6 billion in potentially
fraudulent UI benefits paid in six high-risk areas,\5\ and estimated
$191 billion in UI benefits during the pandemic period could have been
paid improperly, with a significant portion attributable to fraud.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ OIG Alert Memorandum: Potentially Fraudulent Unemployment
Insurance Payments in High-Risk Areas Increased to $45.6 Billion
Report Number: 19-22-005-03-315, issued September 21, 2022, https://www.oig.dol.gov/public/reports/oa/2022/19-22-005-03-315.pdf.
\6\ ``The Greatest Theft of American Tax Dollars: Unchecked
Unemployment Fraud,'' Hearing, Statement for the Record of Larry D.
Turner, Inspector General, U.S. Department of Labor; House Committee
on Ways and Means, February 8, 2023, available at: https://www.oig.dol.gov/public/testimony/02082023.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Secretary must be able to ensure that the UC program is
administered consistent with the requirements of Federal law. Mandatory
disclosure of confidential UC information to Federal officials,
including DOL-OIG, for the purpose of UC program oversight and audits
is essential to ensure the UC program is being administered consistent
with Federal law and to identify and prevent fraud. ARPA grant
conditions temporarily required such disclosures; however, these grants
were terminated in May 2025. Codifying the requirement for disclosures
will allow the Department to continue its important work of identifying
and preventing fraud in the UC program.
2. Alternatives Considered
OMB Circular A-4, which outlines best practices in regulatory
analysis, directs agencies to analyze reasonable regulatory
alternatives to the proposed regulatory action. Accordingly, the
Department considered two alternatives regarding disclosure of
confidential UC information to Federal officials for the purposes of UC
program oversight and audits. The first alternative was to make
comprehensive updates to 20 CFR part 603, including to require States
to disclose confidential UC information to DOL-OIG for the purposes of
UC program oversight and audits. The comprehensive updates the
Department considered and that were described in the Fall 2024 Unified
Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions would have included
additional amendments regarding issues raised by stakeholders over the
years, including addressing questions around sharing information across
the workforce system, the permissibility and use cases of sharing
information with agencies within the Department for analysis and
evaluation, the permissibility of disclosing confidential UC
information to federally recognized Indian tribes, data warehousing,
and the use of contractors and subcontractors. While the Department
gained valuable information from the engagement with stakeholders and
the related request for information that was published on July 25, 2023
(88 FR 47829), the Department ultimately decided that the most critical
step needed at this time was to address fraud in the UC program by
ensuring the Department, including the DOL-OIG, has access to data to
conduct oversight and combat fraud.
Another option considered was to make no change to 20 CFR part 603
concerning disclosure of confidential UC information to Federal
officials, including to DOL-OIG. The Department decided against
maintaining the status quo because the rise of fraud incidents and
sophisticated multistate fraud schemes demand immediate action by the
Department to strengthen program integrity and safeguard the UC program
from fraudulent activity.
3. Economic Analysis
The Department conducted an economic analysis to determine the
costs of the proposed rule and to consider the benefits and the impact
of transfers under the rule. The Department recognizes potential costs
of the rule for required technological upgrades, compliance costs, and
costs related to data submission. However, data availability prevents
the Department from estimating these costs. The Department understands
that many State UC agencies are already disclosing the information that
this proposed rule would codify to the DOL-OIG, minimizing any new
costs, but the Department lacks sufficient data to quantify the number
of State UC agencies doing so. Separately, the Department lacks
information about the number of DOL-OIG disclosure requests that State
UC agencies receive annually as well as the costs associated with such
disclosures incurred by States. We seek comments on the number of, and
the costs, burdens, and/or benefits associated with, requests for
confidential UC information States receive annually from the DOL-OIG.
Additionally, the proposed rule would impose a one-time regulatory
familiarization cost on the 53 State UC agencies. These costs are
associated with State UC agency staff reviewing the new regulation and
conducting internal discussions and are determined using U.S. Bureau of
Labor Statistics (BLS) Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics
(OEWS) data and estimates of the time required to become familiar with
the rule.
The Department considers the potential benefits of the proposed
rule to be significant, including strengthening program integrity and
building and maintaining public trust in the system. Specific benefits
include enhancement of fraud prevention, identification, and
investigation and providing strong oversight and accountability through
timely audits and evaluations. The proposed rule would result in
evidence-based policymaking, but data availability and uncertainty
limit the Department's ability to quantify the potential benefits of
the rule.
i. Rule Familiarization Costs
Regulatory familiarization costs represent direct costs to the 53
State UC agencies with UC programs that will need to review the new
regulation in order to implement it. Consequently, the proposed rule
will impose a one-time familiarization cost to those entities in the
first year after promulgation. The Department anticipates that the
changes introduced by the rule will be reviewed by General and
Operations Managers (SOC code \7\ 11-1021), Lawyers (SOC code 23-1011),
and Computer Systems Analysts (SOC code 15-1211) employed by State UC
agencies within the State government. The Department anticipates that
it will take one State UC Manager, Lawyer, and Computer Systems Analyst
an average of 1 hour to
[[Page 42146]]
review the rule and hold a meeting concerning the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ This analysis uses codes from the Standard Occupational
Classification (SOC) system and the North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The BLS OEWS data show that the median hourly wage of a State
government General and Operations Manager is $58.81.\8\ The Department
assumes a 62 percent benefits rate \9\ and a 17 percent overhead
rate,\10\ so the fully loaded wage rate is $105.27 [= $58.81 + ($58.81
x 62%) + ($58.81 x 17%)]. The BLS OEWS data shows that the median
hourly wage of a State government Lawyer is $56.51.\11\ The fully
loaded wage rate is $101.15 [= $56.51 + ($56.51 x 62%)+ ($56.51 x
17%)]. The BLS OEWS data show that the median hourly wage of a State
government Computer Systems Analyst is $42.86.\12\ The fully loaded
wage rate is $76.72 [= $42.86 + ($42.86 x 62%) + ($42.86 x 17%)].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ General and Operations Managers (11-1021), for industry type
``State Government, excluding Schools and Hospitals'', period May
2024. Data extracted on June 17, 2025, from https://www.bls.gov/oes/
.
\9\ BLS, ``National Compensation Survey, Employer Costs for
Employee Compensation,'' https://www.bls.gov/ecec/data.htm (last
visited May 27, 2025). For State and local government workers, wages
and salaries averaged $38.45 per hour worked in 2024, while benefit
costs averaged $23.81, which is a benefits rate of 62 percent.
\10\ Cody Rice, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, ``Wage
Rates for Economic Analyses of the Toxics Release Inventory
Program,'' June 10, 2002, https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPPT-2014-0650-0005.
\11\ Lawyers (23-1011) for industry type ``State Government,
excluding Schools and Hospitals'', period May 2024. Data extracted
on June 18, 2025, from https://www.bls.gov/oes.
\12\ Computer Systems Analysts (15-1211) for industry type
``State Government, excluding Schools and Hospitals'', period May
2024. Data extracted on June 18, 2025, from https://www.bls.gov/oes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The time burden of 1 hour was multiplied by the estimated number of
entities (53), and the total of the loaded hourly wage rate of the
readers ($105.27 + $101.15 + $76.72 = $283.14). This calculation
results in a one-time undiscounted cost of $15,006.42 in the first year
after the rule takes effect.
ii. Technology Costs for State UC Agencies
This proposed rule, if finalized, may require States to update
computer systems and security protocols in order to comply with Federal
and State laws concerning safeguarding confidential UC information.
State UC agencies already have systems in place for providing
information to DOL-OIG. However, some States may need to perform
upgrades to information technology systems in order to provide
additional data required under this proposed rule. The Department is
unable to quantify the number of States that may need to perform IT
updates, and determine whether updates would require upgrades to
existing technology or the purchasing of entirely new systems. The
Department is soliciting comments concerning the costs to the States to
update their information technology systems as a result of this
proposal, and if there are any other operational or logistical
impediments at the State level for providing additional data to DOL-OIG
or other Federal officials.
iii. Costs for Compliance With State Laws
The requirements for disclosures under State law vary from State to
State, as the regulation establishes the Federal minimum requirements.
The Department is unable to identify those State law requirements and
therefore cannot quantify any associated costs. The Department solicits
comments concerning State laws that may impose additional requirements
for the disclosure of data and the costs to comply with those State
laws.
iv. Costs for Data Request Fulfillment
Grant funds may be used to cover the costs of providing required
data under this rule to Federal officials for UC program oversight and
audits. It is not clear whether the data requests received will be the
same requests for data that States already fulfill, or if the amended
rule will result in new requests. Because of this ambiguity, the
Department cannot quantify the increased cost to the States to respond
to the data requests, but acknowledges that grant funds may be used by
the States to offset possible increases in costs. The Department
invites States to comment with information on the costs States incur to
provide data to DOL-OIG and additional costs States may incur to
provide data to entities under this rule.
v. Non-Quantifiable Benefits
The proposed rule is expected to generate several important
unquantified benefits that would support the integrity and
effectiveness of the UC program. Chief among these is the enhancement
of fraud prevention and detection capabilities. By requiring the
disclosure of confidential UC information to Federal officials,
including DOL-OIG, the proposed rule would enable more effective
identification and investigation of fraudulent claims, including
complex, multistate schemes. This increased access to data also would
strengthen overall program integrity by ensuring that benefits are paid
only to eligible individuals and withheld from those who are
ineligible, thus aligning the regulation with the statutory requirement
for accurate and timely payments under Section 303(a)(1) of the SSA.
In addition, the proposed rule would promote stronger oversight and
accountability by facilitating consistent and timely audits and
evaluations by Federal entities. This oversight helps ensure that State
UC programs are administered in compliance with Federal law and best
practices. As noted above, confidential UC information has been
collected by DOL-OIG since 2020 under various authorities. This
proposed rule would formalize that relationship and close an oversight
gap by requiring such information be disclosed upon request to the
Department and other Federal officials for UC program oversight and
audits.
Moreover, because the rule would require disclosure of confidential
UC information to Federal officials for purposes of UC program
oversight and audits, the proposed rule would facilitate evidence-based
policy making to support program integrity and performance. This data-
driven approach would enhance the efficiency and responsiveness of the
UC program. The proposed rule also aligns with recent executive orders
aimed at reducing information silos and improving interagency
collaboration to combat waste, fraud, and abuse.
Finally, by reinforcing transparency and accountability in the
administration of the UC program, the proposed rule would help to build
and maintain public trust in the system. Although these potential
benefits are not readily quantifiable, they represent significant
improvements in the administration, oversight, and public perception of
the UC program.
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. chapter 6, requires
the Department to evaluate the economic impact of this rule on small
entities. The RFA defines small entities to include small businesses,
small organizations, including not-for-profit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions. The Department must determine whether the
rule will impose a significant economic impact on a substantial number
of such small entities. The Department concludes that this rule does
not regulate any small entities directly, so any regulatory effect on
small entities will be indirect. Accordingly, the Department has
determined this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
[[Page 42147]]
substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the RFA.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
The purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., include minimizing the paperwork burden on
affected entities. The PRA requires certain actions before an agency
can adopt or revise a collection of information, including publishing
for public comment a summary of the collection of information and a
brief description of the need for and proposed use of the information.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent
burden, the Department conducts a preclearance consultation program to
provide the public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment
on proposed and continuing collections of information in accordance
with the PRA. See 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A). This activity helps to
ensure that the public understands the Department's collection
instructions, respondents can provide the requested data in the desired
format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized,
collection instruments are clearly understood, and the Department can
properly assess the impact of collection requirements on respondents.
A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of
information unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The public is also not
required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. In addition, notwithstanding any
other provisions of law, no person will be subject to penalty for
failing to comply with a collection of information if the collection of
information does not display a currently valid OMB control number (44
U.S.C. 3512).
Confidential UC data are currently collected by DOL-OIG, which will
continue to collect the data after this rulemaking becomes effective.
In accordance with the Inspector General Empowerment Act of 2016,
Offices of Inspectors General are exempt from the procedural
requirements for information collections under the PRA when they are
conducting an authorized audit, investigation, inspection, evaluation,
or review. The Department, beyond DOL-OIG, is not collecting this
information from States at this time.
D. Review Under Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
E.O. 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10, 1999), imposes
certain requirements on Federal agencies formulating and implementing
policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have Federalism
implications. E.O. 13132 requires agencies to examine the
constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would
limit the policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess
the necessity for such actions. E.O. 13132 also requires agencies to
have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely input by
State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have Federalism implications. The Department has reviewed this
proposed rule in light of these requirements and has concluded that it
meets the requirements of E.O. 13132.
Accordingly, the Department has reviewed this proposed rule and has
concluded that the rulemaking has no substantial direct effects on
States, the relationship between the Federal Government and the States,
or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government as described by E.O. 13132. Therefore, the
Department has concluded that this proposed rule does not have a
sufficient federalism implication to require further agency action or
analysis.
E. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal
regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the
private sector. Public Law 104-4, sec. 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531).
For a regulatory action likely to result in a rule that may cause the
expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one year
(adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a
Federal agency to publish a written statement that estimates the
resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy. 2
U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)). UMRA also requires a Federal agency to develop an
effective process to permit timely input by elected officers of State,
local, and Tribal governments on a ``significant intergovernmental
mandate,'' and requires an agency plan for giving notice and
opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small governments
before establishing any requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect them.
The Department examined this proposed rule according to UMRA and
its statement of policy and determined that this proposed rule does not
contain a Federal intergovernmental mandate, nor is it expected to
require expenditures of $100 million or more in any one year by State,
local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private
sector. As a result, the analytical requirements of UMRA do not apply.
F. Executive Order 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)
The Department has reviewed this proposed rule under the terms of
E.O. 13175 and the Department's Tribal Consultation Policy and has
concluded that the proposed changes to regulatory text would not have
Tribal implications. These proposed changes do not have substantial
direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, the relationship between
the Federal government and Indian tribes, nor the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal government and Tribal
Governments.
G. Review Under Executive Order 12630
Pursuant to E.O. 12630, ``Governmental Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights,'' 53 FR 8859 (March
18, 1988), DOL has determined that this proposed rule would not result
in any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
H. Plain Language
E.O. 12866, E.O. 13563, and the Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
1998 (Plain Language in Government Writing), direct executive
departments and agencies to use plain language in all rulemaking
documents published in the Federal Register. The goal is to make the
government more responsive, accessible, and understandable in its
communications with the public. Accordingly, the Department drafted
this proposed rule in plain language.
List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 603
Unemployment compensation, Wages.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Department of Labor
proposes to amend 20 CFR part 603 as follows:
PART 603--FEDERAL-STATE UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION (UC) PROGRAM;
CONFIDENTIALITY AND DISCLOSURE OF STATE UC INFORMATION
0
1. The authority citation for part 603 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 116, 189, 503, Pub. L. 113-128, 128 Stat. 1425
(Jul. 22, 2014); 20 U.S.C. 1232g.
[[Page 42148]]
0
2. Amend Sec. 603.5 by removing paragraph (i) and revising the
introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 603.5 What are the exceptions to the confidentiality
requirement?
The following are exceptions to the confidentiality requirement.
Disclosure of confidential UC information is permissible under the
exceptions in paragraphs (a) through (g) of this section only if
authorized by State law and if such disclosure does not interfere with
the efficient administration of the State UC law. Disclosure of
confidential UC information is permissible under the exception in
paragraph (h) of this section without such restrictions.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 603.6 by redesignating paragraph (c) as paragraph (d)
and adding a new paragraph (c) as follows:
Sec. 603.6 What disclosures are required by this subpart?
* * * * *
(c) The Department of Labor interprets Section 303(a)(1), SSA, as
requiring the disclosure of confidential UC information to a Federal
official for purposes of UC program oversight and audits.
* * * * *
0
4. Amend Sec. 603.8 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 603.8 What are the requirements for payment of costs and program
income?
* * * * *
(b) Use of grant funds permitted. Grant funds paid to a State under
Section 302(a), SSA, may be used to pay the costs of only those
disclosures necessary for proper administration of the UC program.
(This may include some disclosures under Sec. 603.5(a) (concerning
public domain information), Sec. 603.5(c) (to an individual or
employer), and Sec. 603.5(d)(1) (to an agent).) In addition, grant
funds may be used to pay costs of disclosures under Sec. 603.6(a) (for
the proper administration of the UC program) and Sec. 603.6(c) (for UC
Program Oversight and Audits). Grant funds may also be used to pay
costs associated with disclosures under Sec. 603.7(b)(1) (concerning
court-ordered compliance with subpoenas) if a court has denied recovery
of costs, or to pay costs associated with disclosures under Sec.
603.7(b)(2) (to officials with subpoena authority) if the State UC
agency has attempted but not been successful in obtaining reimbursement
of costs. Finally, grant funds may be used to pay costs associated with
any disclosure of UC information if not more than an incidental amount
of staff time and no more than nominal processing costs are involved in
making the disclosure.
* * * * *
Susan Frazier,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training, Labor.
[FR Doc. 2025-16645 Filed 8-28-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FW-P