Click on the link below to view, save, or print out the document.

Reference: 20 CFR 653.108 (e), 20 CFR 658.602 (c) and 20 CFR 658.603 (f)(12). Background: The National Monitor Advocate Training Conference is held annually in conjunction with other migrant and seasonal farmworker (MSFW) national activities. Training is provided specifically on the Monitor Advocate program and corresponding regulations, allowing opportunity for the National, Regional, and State Monitor Advocates to jointly participate in the discussion and resolution of operational concerns of the Employment Service (ES) Monitor Advocate Program. The 1993 training is scheduled for February 23-26, 1993. This year's Training Conference will be held in conjunction with the Midwest Association of Farmworker Organizations' (MAFO) national conference entitled "Future Partnerships Evolving from Common Ground." Participants in this conference will include JTPA 402 grantees, other MSFW service providers, and Monitor Advocates. Also, the participation of the Monitor Advocates has been expanded from previous years. Aside from the training, the Monitor Advocate Program will also facilitate events on the MAFO conference agenda. First is a plenary session through which an overview of the Monitor Advocate Program will be presented, the second will be a workshop on the topic of the ES Complaint System. Both will be facilitated in full by Regional and State Monitor Advocates. Annual Monitor Advocate Training: Aside from the technical assistance training, a major objective of the Monitor Advocates is the development of a paper which could more clearly define the role of advocacy in the Monitor Advocate Program. Upon completion, this paper will be presented to the National Office for review and comment. Mr. David Webb, Region IX's Monitor Advocate has taken the lead on developing this paper. In order to make a contribution to the preparation of this paper, we request that Regional and State Monitor Advocates respond to the following questions: 1) State Monitor Advocate's definition of advocacy; 2) What is the State Monitor Advocate doing in terms of advocacy; 3) What some of the issues are that should be addressed in terms of advocacy; 4) Who else within your State advocates on behalf of MSFWs and what are they doing; 5) According to Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers within your State, what should the State Monitor Advocates be advocating. The State Monitor Advocates are requested to submit their responses to these issues to the following address: Mr. David L. Webb ETA Region IX Monitor Advocate P.O. Box 193767 San Francisco, California 94119-3767 Participation: It is important that all State Monitor Advocates participate in the conference. Accommodations: The conference will be held at the Kona Kai Resort, 1551 Shelter Island Drive, San Diego, California 92106. Participants should contact the hotel directly at (800) 325-2218 or (619) 221-1191 to ensure the availability of the pre-arranged room rate of $65 plus tax per day for single or double room. The conference will begin at 8:30 a.m., February 23, 1993 and end at noon on February 26, 1993. Conference registration fee is $125.00; please send directly to MAFO, P.O. Box 06129, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53204. Early registration is highly recommended. Action Required: SESA Administrators are requested to encourage attendance of State Monitor Advocates. State and local Agricultural Program Specialists and Outreach Staff are also encouraged to attend.

References: Chapter V, Section 5, and Chapter XI, Section 1, ET Handbook No. 391. Background: Recently, the Office of Personnel Management issued official 1995 pay tables (copies of Tables A and B attached) authorized by the President reflecting new pay raises for GS employees. Table A shows the new salaries for GS employees incorporating a 2.00% increase effective January 1995. Table B shows the new salaries for GS employees incorporating the 2.00% increase and a locality payment of 5.48% for the locality pay area of Washington- Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV (Net Increase 3.22%) effective January 1995. The locality rates of pay are considered basic pay for retirement, life insurance, premium pay, and severance pay purposes and for advances in pay. They are also used to compute worker's compensation payments and lump-sum payments for accrued and accumulated annual leave. They are NOT considered basic pay for other pay administration purposes. All eligible white-collar workers automatically get the 2% national pay raise. But many civil servants who already are paid higher rates because they are in hard-to-fill jobs (such as Grade 2 through 7 clerical workers, scientists and engineers) will not get the 1.22% raise. A few will get part of the locality adjustment. Postal workers and DC government employees do not get either the national or locality raise. Federal and military retirees, whose pensions are linked to inflation, will get a 2.8% cost-of-living adjustment. That adjustment will show up in their April annuity checks. Instructions: SESAs should provide copies of the attached GS Tables to appropriate staff members engaged in UCFE claims activities. Action Required: SESAs should follow the above instructions and provide the attached revised Federal Pay Tables to appropriate staff.

References: Wagner-Peyser Act, as amended (29 U.S.C. 49); 20 CFR 652 and 20 CFR 653; Job Training Partnership Act, Sections 202, 252, 262, 302, and 601, as amended by the Job Training Reform Amendments Act of 1992; Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) No. 4-88. Background: Title II-A was divided into two separate programs (II-A and II-C) under the JTPA Amendments of 1992. The revised Title II-A is the Adult Training Program, and the new Title II-C is the Youth Training Program. The JTPA Titles II-A, II-C and III allotments, and the Wagner-Peyser preliminary planning estimates, are for the program period July 1, 1993 through June 30, 1994. The Title II-B allotments are for the 1993 summer period ending September 30, 1993. These JTPA allotments and the Wagner-Peyser preliminary planning estimates will be published in the Federal Register. The allotments for Title II-B total $682,912,000, approximately the same as the previous year's level without the Emergency Supplemental appropriations. The Congress provided 1993 Summer Youth funds in two amounts totaling $682,912,000: $495,212,000 is from the PY 1992 appropriation and became available for obligation on July 1, 1992; and $187,700,000 was made available for obligation on October 1, 1993, thus it is a Fiscal Year 1993 appropriation. This requires that the funds be issued separately on the Notice of Obligation (NOO), and that States draw funds from the Payment Management System for each separate fund source. Separate financial reporting will not be required, however. The allotments for Titles II-A, II-C, and III, and the ES preliminary planning estimates, are part of the Fiscal Year 1993 funds appropriated by the Department of Labor Appropriations Act, 1993, P.L. 102-394, for PY 1993. These appropriations include $1,045,021,000 for Title II-A and $696,682,000 for Title II-C, a 1.79 percent reduction from the PY 1992 Title II-A level; $517,046,000 for Title III, a 1.9 percent reduction from PY 1992; and $810,960,000 for allotments to States under Wagner-Peyser, a 1.3 percent reduction from PY 1992. An additional $3,831,000 has been appropriated for Title II programs in rural concentrated employment programs (RCEPs). Distribution of funds for the RCEPs is discussed below under item 5. Attached for your information is a copy of the letter sent to each Governor (Attachment I) transmitting the allotments and planning estimates. JTPA/ES Joint planning and Coordination Provisions: Each State should develop plans in accordance with relevant statutory provisions and schedules issued by the Department. Particular attention should be given to the Governor's statement of goals and objectives for JTPA, and joint ES/JTPA planning initiatives (see Section 8(b) of the Wagner-Peyser Act, as amended). Employment Service plans should foster the delivery of quality services to job seekers and employers by providing: relevant labor market information to job seekers, employers, and other users in the local labor market; enhanced employability services, e.g., counseling, assessment, referral to training, and other needed services; and other appropriate services responsive to State economic needs and conditions. RCEP States: Additional funds are available to assure, to the maximum extent possible, that funding for RCEPs under Title II programs is maintained at prior year levels. The Department previously reserved $250,000 from PY 1992 RCEP funds to be used for this purpose in the CY 1993 summer program. The RCEP appropriation for PY 1993 is $3,831,000. Of this amount, $250,000 is being reserved for the CY 1994 summer program. Therefore, $3,581,000 will be available for PY 1993 Titles II-A and II-C programs. It will be necessary for the States of Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, and Wisconsin to provide the Department with the amount of the Titles II-A, II-B, and II-C RCEP allocations based on the allotments contained in this Training and Employment Guidance Letter. This information should be sent no later than March 5, 1993, to the following address: Mr. Hugh Davies Acting Director Office of Employment and Training Programs 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Room N-4703 Washington, D.C. 20210 Notices of Obligation (NOO): NOOs for the 1993 Title II-B summer youth program, including the additional funds for RCEPs, will be issued in April. NOOs for the PY 1993 Titles II-A, II-C, and III programs will be issued for all funds on July 1, 1993. These NOOs will include the additional Titles II-A and II-C funds for the RCEPs. A second NOO will be issued to each State after November 1 for Title III, to increase or reduce the funds available to the State to reflect the amount of reallotted funds the State gains or loses, as discussed in TEGL No. 4-88. Title II-A Allotments: Attachment II shows the PY 1993 JTPA Title II-A allotments by State. For all States, Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia, the following data were used in computing the allotments: -- Data for Areas of Substantial Unemployment (AS Us) are averages for the 12-month period, July 1991 through June 1992. -- The number of excess unemployed individuals or the ASU excess (depending on which is higher) are averages for this same 12-month period. -- The economically disadvantaged adult data (age 2272, excluding college students and military) are from the 1990 Census. This data will be made available on diskette to the State JTPA Liaisons. The demographics will also be rolled up to the Service Delivery Area (SDA) level. The allotments for the Insular Areas, including the Freely Associated States, are based on unemployment data from the 1990 census, or if not available, the most recent data available. A 90-percent relative share "hold-harmless" of the Title II-A PY 1992 allotments for these areas and a minimum allotment of $75,000 were also applied in determining the allotments. This minimum amount equals 60 percent of the old Title II-A minimum allotment since the JTPA Amendments of 1992 divided Title II-A into Titles II-A and II-C, and the Title II-A appropriation is 60 percent of the sum of Titles II-A and II-C. Title II-A funds are to be distributed among designated SDAs according to the statutory formula contained in Section 202(b) of JTPA, as amended by Section 701(c) of the JTPA Amendments of 1992. The formula specified by Section 701(c) of the Amendments is used since the FY 1993 appropriation level meets the conditions of that Section. This is the same formula which has been used in previous program years. In determining any necessary hold-harmless levels for SDAs, the States of Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, and Wisconsin shall not include any additional funds provided for RCEPs. Title II-B Allotments: Attachment III shows the 1993 JTPA Title II-B allotments by State and by fund source, with totals. The data used for these allotments are the same data as were used for Title II-A and II-C allotments, except for the number of economically disadvantaged. The total number of economically disadvantaged individuals (including college and military) from the 1990 census was used. This follows the "old" definition of "economically disadvantaged" rather than the definition found in the 1992 Amendments which will not be in effect until July 1, 1993, and therefore is not applicable to these Title II-B allotments. For the Insular Areas and Native Americans, the amount is based on the percentage of Title II-B funds each received during the previous summer. Title II-B funds for the 1993 Summer program are to be distributed among designated SDAs in accordance with the statutory formula contained in Section 252(b) of JTPA, prior to the Amendments of 1992. This is the same formula that has been used in previous program years. In determining any necessary hold-harmless levels for SDAs, the States of Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, and Wisconsin shall not include any additional funds provided for RCEPs. Title II-C Allotments: Attachment IV shows the 1993 JTPA Title II-C allotments by State. The data used for these allotments are the same data as were used for Title II-A allotments, except that the number of economically disadvantaged youth (age 16-21, excluding college and military) is used rather than the number of adults. The allotments for the Insular Areas, including the Freely Associated States, are based on unemployment data from the 1990 census or, if not available, the most recent data available. A 90-percent relative share "hold-harmless" of the PY 1992 Title II-A allotments for these areas and a minimum allotment of $50,000 were also applied in determining the allotments. This minimum amount equals 40 percent of the old Title II-A minimum allotment,since the JTPA Amendments of 1992 divided Title II-A into Titles II-A and II-C, and the Title II-C appropriation is 40 percent of the sum of Titles II-A and II-C. Title II-C funds are to be distributed among designated SDAs according to the statutory formula contained in Section 262(b) of JTPA, as amended by Section 701(f) of the JTPA Amendments of 1992. The formula specified by Section 701(f) of the Amendments is used since the FY 1993 appropriation level meets the conditions of that Section. In determining any necessary hold-harmless levels for SDAs, the States of Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, and Wisconsin shall not include any additional funds provided for RCEPs. Title III Allotments: Attachment V shows the PY 1993 JTPA Title III allotments by State. The total appropriation includes 80 percent allotted by formula to the States, and 20 percent for the National Reserve, including funds allotted to the Insular Areas. Title III formula funds are to be distributed to State and sub state grantees in accordance with the provisions in Section 302(c) and (d) of JTPA, as amended. The unemployment data used for computing these State allotments, relative numbers of unemployed and relative numbers of excess unemployed, are averages for the October 1991 through September 1992 period. Long-term unemployed data used were for CY 1991. Allotments for the Insular Areas are based on the PY 1993 Title II-A allotments for these areas. Reallotments: Re allotments of these published Title III formula funds, as provided for by Section 303 of JTPA, as amended, will be based on completed program year expenditure reports submitted by the States and received by October 1, 1993. Title III allotments will be adjusted upward or downward, based on whether the State is eligible to share in reallotted funds or is subject to recapture. ES Planning Estimates: Attachment VI shows ES planning estimates for PY 1993 which have been produced using the formula set forth at Section 6 of the Wagner-Peyser Act, 29 U.S.C. 49e. These preliminary estimates are based on averages for the most current 12 months ending September 1992 for each State's share of the civilian labor force (CLF) and unemployment. Final planning estimates will be published in the Federal Register within 90 days, based on Calendar Year 1992 data, as required by the Wagner-Peyser Act. The total planning estimate does not include $19,138,700 or 2.36 percent of the total amount available. This amount is withheld from distribution to States to finance postage costs associated with the conduct of Employment Service business. The Department is proposing in a Federal Register Notice, soon to be published, that it will allocate postage resources to the States effective October 1, 1993. For information purposes, Attachment VII reflects the preliminary planning estimates including postage distribution to States for three quarters of PY 1993 (October 1, 1993 - June 30, 1994). A final decision on whether to allocate postage resources to the States will be made prior to the final allocations. The Secretary of Labor has set aside 3 percent of the total available funds to assure that each State will have sufficient resources to maintain statewide employment services, as required under Section 6(b)(4) of the Wagner-Peyser Act. In accordance with this provision, $23,754,639 is set aside for the administrative formula allocation. These set aside funds are included in the total planning estimate. Set aside funds are distributed in two steps to States which have lost in relative share of resources from the prior year. In step one, States which have a CLF below one million and are below the median CLF density are maintained at 100 percent of their relative share of prior year resources. All remaining funds are distributed on a pro rat a basis in step two to all other States losing in relative share from the prior year but which do not meet the size and density criteria for step one. Ten percent of the total sums allotted to each State shall be reserved for use by the Governor to provide performance incentives for public ES offices; services for groups with special needs; and for the extra costs of exemplary models for delivering job services. Action: a. Title II-A allotments are subject to the distribution requirements contained in Sections 162(e) and 202(b) of JTPA, as amended. b. Title II-B allotments are subject to the distribution requirements contained in Sections 162(e), and 252(b) of JTPA, prior to JTPA Amendments of 1992. c. Title II-C allotments are subject to the distribution requirements contained in Sections 162(e) and 262(b) of JTPA, as amended. d. Title III funds are subject to the distribution requirements contained in Sections 302(c) and (d) of JTPA, as amended. e. RCEP States should forward the following information to the address listed in item ; above not later than March 5, 1993: (1) PY 1993 Titles II-A and II-C formula allocations for the RCEPs in Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, and Wisconsin. (2) CY 1993 Title II-B formula allocations for RCEPs in these States. f. States should initiate PY 1993 planning consistent with provisions of the Wagner-Peyser Act and Federal Regulations at 20 CFR Part 652.

References: Sections 206, 256, and 266 of Title II of Public Law 102-367; TEIN No. 16-92, transfer of 1992 Title II-B Summer Youth Funds to Title II-A. Background: The JTPA Amendments of 1992 established new criteria for operating Title II program activities, identified new Title II cost categories, and provided SDAs with the option to transfer funds between the "Parts" within Title II. Program Year 1993 will serve as a transition period for using remaining balances of prior year available funds, and initiating the SDA option of intra-Title II fund transfers. This guidance is being provided to alert States and SDAs to the options for the use of PY 1992 and earlier funds in the local planning process for PY 1993, and for PY 1993 funds to be transferred among parts in PY 1993 and in subsequent years. Using Prior Year Title II Funds: The Interim Final Rule at 20 CFR 627.903(d) provides that the balance of any available Title II-A funds as of June 30, 1993, may be used for PY 1993 activity. Any affected Title II-A funds will be governed by Section 203(b)(1). Of these funds, not less than 40 percent, or the rate approved by the Governor as established under Section 203(b)(2), must be used in PY 1993 as Title II-C funds to provide services to eligible youth. All affected amounts will be subject to the cost limitation and reporting requirements of the new JTPA Amendments and implementing regulations and will assume the identity of the Title II "Part~ receiving the funds; i.e., Title II-A or Title II-C. Accounting requirements: For accounting and record keeping purposes, all prior year funds used for PY 1993 activity will retain their appropriation year identity. Cash will continue to be drawn under the Payment Management System as Title II-A until all amounts have been expended. Residual Title II-A amounts not used for PY 1993 activity will be governed by current requirements. Prior year funds used for PY 1993 activity must be accounted for and reported separately. Reporting instructions for all JTPA funds will be issued shortly. Intra-Title II Funds Transfer: The Interim Final Rule at 20 CFR 628.550 provides SDAs with the flexibility to transfer funds within Title II, if such transfers are described in the job training plan and approved by the Governor. The three optional fund transfers include: (a) Section 206 states that a service delivery area may transfer up to 10 percent of the amounts allocated under part A to the program under part C if such transfer is described in the job training plan and the transfer is approved by the governor; (b) Section 256 states that a service delivery area may transfer up to 10 percent of the funds provided to the program under part B to the program under part C if the transfer is approved by the Governor; and (c) Section 266 states that a service delivery area may transfer up to 10 percent of the amounts allocated under part C to the program under part A if such transfer is described in the job training plan and the transfer is approved by the Governor. Beginning with the PY 1993 funding period, transferring amounts within Title II are optional for the SDAs. The Governor is responsible for determining the frequency of such transfers and ensuring that job training plans are modified as necessary. Notices of obligational authority, funding availability, or other similar documents issued by the State to the SDAs will be revised to reflect all transfers. The Department encourages all such transfers to be completed prior to the end of the affected program year. All transfers must be reflected on appropriate financial reports. Financial reporting instructions will be issued separately. Action: For the PY 1993 planning process, SDAs may use available PY 1992 and earlier Title II-A funds for Titles II-A and Title II-C purposes in PY 1993, and may also transfer PY 1993 Title II-A, II-B, and II-C funds to Titles II-A and II-C. States should ensure that prior year Title II-A funds used for PY 1993 activity and intra-Title II fund transfers are consistent with this issuance.

Background: Instruction for reporting data for the EUC program is listed in GAL No. 12-92, Attachment C. At the time of the issuance, all EUC data except that reported on the ETA 539 and ETA 2112 were to be reported on separate paper forms and mailed to the National Office. EUC data for the ETA 539 and ETA 2112 were to be put in the comments section of the regular electronically transmitted reports. Separate Electronic Reports: Separate input screens for the electronic reporting system have now been developed for the ETA 207, ETA 218, ETA 227, ETA 5130, ETA 5159, and ETA 2112. These screens should be available to States for electronic entry on, or about, February 16, 1993. State UI Network System Administrators will be informed a few days prior to the download. Reporting instructions remain the same. Only the method of reporting is changed from paper copy to electronic. The EUC data associated with the ETA 2112 will now be reported electronically on a separate screen. The ETA 539 will continue to have associated EUC data reported in the comments section of the regular electronically transmitted report. OMB Approval: These reporting requirements are approved under OMB approval number 1205-0317, expiring December 31, 1993. Action Required: SESA Administrators should inform appropriate personnel of this change in method of reporting and begin electronic reporting with the first reports due after the download of screen programs on or about February 16, 1993.

Background.: Beginning with the implementation of the UI QC Program in 1986, SESAs and Regional Offices (RO) received ADP equipment with which to accomplish QC-related tasks. The Digital Equipment Corporation's Pro 380 microcomputers were initially introduced to support these tasks. In 1989, these computers were replaced with Artecon's SUN 3/60 computers. The Artecon computer systems also included a number of peripheral devices, such as modems, terminal servers, tape drives, and printers. During the summer and fall of 1994, the Artecon computers were upgraded to Sun SPARC 10 computers and the Sun 3/60 computer phase-out period was initiated. QC/UIRR Equipment Utilization and Disposition Policy: SESA QC/UIRR equipment is Department of Labor (DOL) purchased equipment or supplies issued to the States and subject to the DOL administrative requirements of 29 CFR 97.32 (equipment) and 29 CFR 97.33 (supplies). The terms "equipment" and "supplies" are defined at 29 CFR 97.3. Most of the peripheral equipment previously used with the SUN 3/60s has been integrated into the new SPARC 10 computer systems. This equipment includes Telebit modems, Exabyte 8mm tape drives, Kennedy 9-track tape drives, and Xylogics Annex Box terminal servers. Maintenance and Repair.: Maintenance for the SPARC computer systems is covered by a contract agreement between the UI NO and Edge Systems, Inc. Equipment covered by this agreement only includes the SPARC 10 computers and all internal devices, the serial port controller board, the 16" color monitor, the Hewlett Packard (HP) 4Si laser printers, and the new SUN keyboard. The Exabyte 8mm external tape drives, which are required for performing daily back-ups, the Telebit modems, which are required for communications, and the American Power Conversion (APC) uninterruptable power supply (UPS) units, which protect the SPARC computers and Sun monitors from power surges, are not covered under the Edge agreement. However, the NO will ship replacement equipment for these components on an as needed basis. Please note that Edge Systems, Inc. is shipping new UPS units to those SESAs that do not already have an American Power Conversion IPS 1250 unit. Also, the SESA System Administrators should report any problems with the SPARC 10 computer systems to the UI Hotline for resolution. Warranty Equipment.: Other peripheral equipment integrated into the SPARC 10 computer systems includes HP color deskjet printers, Epson dot matrix printers, QUME X-terminals, VT220-compatible terminals, the Kennedy 9-track tape drives and Annex Box terminal servers. The HP deskjet and Epson printers have been ordered, but not yet shipped to the SESAs. Also, some SESAs are still waiting to receive QUME X- terminals--these have also been ordered. Presently, the QUME X-terminal is covered for five years under the manufacturers' "Return to Factory" (RTF) warranty and the Epson and HP deskjet printers are covered under a one year RTF warranty. If service is required on any computer equipment, the SESAs must first contact the NO Hotline at 1-800-473-0188. If the equipment is still under warranty, a Return Merchandise Authorization (RMA) number will be assigned by the Hotline to the defective unit and SESAs will return the component with its identifying RMA to the manufacturer for repair. Please note that all defective equipment must be shipped back in the original shipping containers, so please keep the original packing boxes. A replacement unit will be shipped directly to the SESA from the NO, and the NO will receive the repaired unit from the manufacturer. As warranties expire, SESAs should either have a maintenance contract implemented covering each component, be willing to pay time and materials to cover repair costs, be willing to pay for replacement equipment, or be prepared to do without the equipment if it breaks down. If there are questions regarding repair coverage for a particular component, please call the UI Hotline. Disposal Instructions.: If a piece of QC/UIRR equipment is no longer needed or breaks down and is no longer wanted, the SESA's computer system administrator should obtain serial numbers for that equipment and report the nature of the concern or malfunction to the NO Hotline for further instructions. Hotline staff will determine if the reported equipment is still under warranty or if NO replacement should take place. If the equipment is not under NO support, the SESA's computer system administrator will need to send an e-mail message to the NO (tonight!fran) requesting a Disposal Authorization Number (DAN) for each piece of UI equipment to be disposed of. The message should contain the make, model and serial number of the equipment. The NO will reply and provide a DAN for each item it authorizes for disposal. The SESA computer system administrator should enter the DAN into the SESA's property records and then dispose of the property in accordance with State laws and procedures. UI Policy on Tracking QC/UIRR Equipment. : The UIS will continue to conduct an annual verification of ADP equipment furnished to the States and ROs for use with QC and other UI activities. On or about March 30 each year the NO will provide each RO with the most current list of equipment that has been provided to each SESA in its Region. The RO should request each State agency to correct its equipment list and furnish the RO with a corrected copy so that the RO can ensure that an updated State inventory verification is provided to the UIS NO by the response date. Transition from SUN 3/60 computers to the SPARC 10s.: All UIS-developed applications have now been ported to the new SPARC computers. Finding replacement parts for failing internal components on the old 3/60 computers has become almost impossible. Also, service technicians are no longer familiar with the 3/60 architecture, and are unable to adequately support the 3/60 computers. For these reasons, as well as budget considerations and in accordance with our plan for discontinuing maintenance, maintenance support for the 3/60s will end on December 31, 1994. Some SESAs may wish to develop some work-arounds as support for the 3/60 computers ends. The older SPSS application software, specifically SPSS graphics, including the mapping functionality, is not available on the SPARC 10 computers. Any custom-designed applications created by the SESAs that are based on the SPSS graphics product will be unavailable to users unless the State continues operating the 3/60 computers. SPSS decided to exclude certain functionality in its latest product and the older versions will not run on the new SPARC computers. To date, the NO has been unable to find a cost-effective replacement product. All of the commercial third party software applications, except UltraCalc, the SPSS X-graphics package, and SunLink, will be removed from the 3/60 computers at the end of December. WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3, SPSS, and Informix, were purchased as upgrades on the new SPARC systems, which nullifies the licenses existing on the 3/60s thereby requiring their removal. Only a few SESAs are currently using their Annex Box terminal servers to support attached printers. This print capability is currently only available on the 3/60 computers. The UIS Operations and Support (OPS) group has dedicated staff working on porting the software necessary to provide this printer support on the SPARC computers. It is anticipated that the software will be installed on the SPARC computers in mid-January. For those SESAs that wish to continue using the 3/60 computers for the printer support capability, the NO will accommodate their requests until software is released providing Annex Box terminal server printer support on the SPARC computers. Please remember, however, that maintenance support will not be available if the 3/60 should crash. If this occurs, the Annex Box terminal servers will still support terminals and PCs--but not printers, until the new software is released. The root password for the 3/60 computers will be given to the SESA computer system administrators by the Hotline staff in mid- January, 1995, to coincide with the release of the Annex Box terminal server software. At that time SESAs may request disposal numbers for the 3/60s from the NO. SESAs may elect to keep the 3/60s connected to the new SPARC 10 computers after support has been discontinued. However, the NO reserves the right to have the SESA computer system administrators disconnect the old machine from the SPARC system if it causes any problems. New Printers.: A postscript color printer (the HP 1200C Deskjet) has been ordered for each SESA. The OPS group will begin integration testing on the new printer as soon as testing for the Epson LQ570+ printers has been completed. Both the Epson and HP color printers should be shipped to the SESAs sometime in January, 1995. Action Required.: SESA Administrators are requested to advise staff of the contents of this UIPL.

Click on the link below to view, save, or print out the document.

Reference. Job Training Reform Amendments of 1992. Background. As required by the Job Training Reform Amendments of 1992, the Native American Employment and Training Council was established by charter, effective July 1, 1993. The Department will seek to renew the charter, which terminates on June 30, 1995, for another 2-year period of operation. The present charter provides for seventeen members. Of the initial membership, one half were appointed for 1-year (expiring June 30, 1994) and the balance for 2-years (expiring June 30, 1995). All succeeding Council appointments will be for a 2-year period. In recognition of the special reference to Oklahoma Indians at Section 401 (c)(1)(A) of JTPA, the Department has agreed to increase the Council membership by one seat to accommodate a representative from this State. This increase in authorized membership will be reflected in the amended charter, effective July 1, 1995. The nine present memberships which will expire as of June 30, 1995, are as follows: Region III Ms. Anne Richardson Mattaponi-Pamunkey-Monacan Consortium, Inc. Route 2 - P.O. Box 360 King William, Virginia 23086 Region IV Mr. Elkton Richardson North Carolina Commission of Indian Affairs 325 North Salisbury Street, Suite 579 Raleigh, North Carolina 27603-5940 Region V Ms. Karen Kay Michigan Indian Employment and Training Services, Inc. 2450 Delhi Commerce Drive, Suite 5 Holt, Michigan 48842 Region VI Mr. Frank Siow Pueblo of Laguna P.O. Box 194 Laguna, New Mexico 87026 Region VII Ms. Alice Roach Lincoln Indian Center 1100 Military Road Lincoln, Nebraska 68508 Region VIII Ms. Bernadine Wallace Montana United Indian Association P.O. Box 6043 Helena, Montana 59604 Region IX Mr. Harold Wauneka Navajo Tribe of Indians P.O. Box 1889 Window Rock, Arizona 86515 Region X Ms. Carol Peloza Seattle Indian Center, Inc. 611 - 12th Avenue, South, Suite 300 Seattle, Washington 98144 Other Discipline Dr. Scott Butterfield Indian Educator 456 Flint Ridge Street, S.E. Salem, Oregon 97306 Grantees may renominate these individuals for these memberships, or may submit the names of new individuals. Consistent with the terms of the charter, all nominees must be Indian or Alaskan Native or Hawaiian Native individuals. Only grantees in Regions III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII. IX and X may submit nominations for the expiring memberships in their areas. Only Oklahoma grantees may submit nominations for the new membership representing their State. The Department will accept nominations for the "other discipline" category from all Section 401 grantees. Indian tribes or Indian, Alaskan Native or Hawaiian Native organizations that do not operate Section 401 grants may also submit nominations for the "other discipline" category. Self nominations will also be considered. In the past, responses from the grantee community to our requests for Council nominations have been relatively minimal. It is important that grantees understand that the Council plays a critical role in the Department's new partnership with the grantee community. Particularly in this era of diminishing Federal resources, it is essential that grantees give the most serious consideration to the Council nomination process. As Assistant Secretary Ross stressed at our most recent Council meeting last November, we view Council members not as grantee representatives, but as representatives of the interests of Native Americans in dealing with the Department. In submitting nominations, grantees should consider the willingness of the nominee to attend Council meetings, and to provide feedback to the grantee community. The Department considers the Council as its partner, and, as such, as its major source of consultation with the Section 401 grantee community. Therefore, communication between the prospective Council member and his/her constituency is critical. Action. If you would like to suggest nominees for these expiring memberships, please submit the names of these individuals on the attached nomination form to the following address: Mr. Thomas M. Dowd Chief Division of Indian and Native American Programs U.S. Department of Labor 200 Constitution Avenue, NW Room N-4641 Washington, D.C. 20210 ATTN: Council Desk We would appreciate having the nominations postmarked no later than March 3, 1995. Questions. Contact Mr. Dowd on (202) 219-8502. In his absence, call Mrs. Lois Engel at the same telephone number.

Background: This TAG was prepared by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) to comply with the Job Training Reform Amendments of 1992. It provides States and service delivery areas with the Department's guidance on acceptable documentation in establishing the various eligibility and participation requirements contained in Title II of the Job Training Partnership Act, as amended. Region III's TAG team which was organized to develop this guide, conducted fact-finding sessions with staff and cognizant agencies from the Philadelphia Private Industry Council, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Office of Employment Development, Baltimore, Maryland; Department of Employment Services, Washington, D.C.; Division of Employment and Training, Newark, Delaware; Governor's Employment and Training Department, Richmond, Virginia; Job Training Assistance Program, Richmond, Virginia; and ARBOR Incorporated, Media, Pennsylvania. The team responsible for developing this TAG included representatives from ETA in Region III, Philadelphia Private Industry Council, Delaware County Office of Employment and Training, West Virginia Governor's Oversight Unit for JTPA State Monitoring, National Council of La Raza, Jobs for Youth-Chicago, Directorate of Civil Rights, and the Office of the Inspector General. The TAG was developed using eligibility requirements information from twelve States around the country, and from comments received from States, SDAs, community based organizations, Federal agencies and service providers. In addition, the TAG was field tested by the West Virginia Bureau of Employment Programs. Training: Region III will provide an overview of the TAG in conjunction with USDOL-ETA JTPA amendments training sessions. The training sessions are being conducted at 10 regional sites: Baltimore, Dallas, San Jose, Minneapolis, Boston, New York, Atlanta, Kansas City, Denver, and Seattle-from February 9 through March 12. In the Spring of 1993, Region III will provide in depth train-the-trainer sessions to Regional Office staff who will in turn be available to train States and SDAs. Dates for these sessions will be announced. Distribution: Copies of the TAG are being provided under separate cover to all State Liaisons for distribution to SDA's and to the State JTPA agency. The material has been prepared in a loose-leaf format suitable for use in 3 ring binders. Shipment is expected to arrive at your office shortly after February 8. Copies of the TAG will be provided to all participants at the JTPA amendments training sessions.