Good afternoon, Madam Chairwoman.  On behalf of VVA National President John Rowan and all of our officers and members we thank you for the opportunity for Vietnam Veterans of America (VVA) to appear here today to share our views on several items of pending legislation.  I will briefly summarize the most important points of our statement.

H.R. 2721, Directs: (1) the Secretary of Veterans Affairs (Secretary) to develop and maintain, in a compact disk (CD) read-only memory format, information that lists and explains the health, education, and other benefits for which veterans are eligible through the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA); (2) that a copy of such CD be included as part of the pre-separation counseling provided to each member of the Armed Forces being discharged or released from duty; and (3) the Secretary, Secretary of Defense, and head of any other relevant government agency to each maintain an Internet website containing an explanation of the benefits administered by that Secretary or agency head to which veterans are entitled, and how veterans can secure those benefits.

The concept behind this bill is sound in that depriving veterans of the knowledge and existence of services, entitlements, and benefits is tantamount to denying the benefits. Several years ago, VVA joined with then Congressman Ted Strickland in suing VA to force them to start doing outreach to veterans again. This suit was precipitated by the infamous Laura Miller memo in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) ordering the end to marketing and outreach events. In many cases this memo even led to the denial of VA participation in “Stand Down” events for homeless veterans, as well as the severe curtailing of any efforts to educate veterans as to their earned rights. In the days leading up to actual filing, I asked the VISN Directors at a so-called Leadership Board for a show of hands as to how many were doing significantly less outreach than a year before, and about seven raised their hands. I then asked how many were doing somewhat less, and 8 raised their hands. I asked how many were doing about the same, and three raised their hands. Only one felt was doing more (and it later turned out later that this person was confused by the question). So, we filed suit.

VVA won that suit. The Federal Court held that VVA had standing to sue the VA, that VVA was correct that Title 38 compelled an affirmative responsibility on VA to do outreach to inform veterans or the rights, benefits, and services they have earned by virtue of military service to country, and that VA needed to do more. It was therefore no accident that the “theme” of the 75th Anniversary of the VA was officially stated as “to inform every veteran in America of their rights and benefits.” (Of course that did not happen.)

In preparation for this hearing, VVA asked the Secretary’s office what was the aggregate budget for outreach in the current Fiscal Year, and the two previous Fiscal Years, and how it was apportioned. The answer was that they did not have such a figure, as each and every little program and local facility had their own funds for marketing, education, and outreach as part of their budget allocation, but that it was not tracked centrally, and apparently it is not centrally coordinated or directed either. This is a case of how to ensure that the whole is far less than the sum of the parts.

The idea of giving service members the information in an electronic format at separation or demobilization is a good one, but it must be highly portable, and not necessarily a CD-Rom. (For instance, a “memory stick” containing the information that is also a key chain might work better, and be more likely not to be lost or tossed.)

A supplement to this would be a card that contains all of the key web sites which is the size and shape of a credit card, and so can be put in the separating service member’s wallet and kept until they feel they have a need to use it would be a very inexpensive supplement to this electronic device.

VVA favors this proposal, with a bit of modification, and the addition of a reporting mechanism to the Committee.

H.R. 3786, Servicemembers Telecom Contract Relief Act - Allows a person in military service to terminate a telecommunications contract for cellular phone service, cable or satellite television service, or internet service at any time after: (1) entry into military service; or (2) the date of the station or deployment orders.  Requires for termination that: (1) the contract is executed by or on behalf of a person who thereafter and during the term of the contract enters military service (or receives order to enter military service) under an order specifying a period of not less than 90 days (or who enters military service under an order specifying a period of 90 days or less and who, without a break in service, receives orders extending the period of military service to a period of not less than 90 days); or (2) the person enters into the contract while in military service and thereafter receives military orders for a permanent change of station outside of the continental United States, or to deploy with a military unit for a period of not less than 90 days, to a location that does not support continuation of the service under the contract.

This is an important update of protections and relief to our service members, and VVA favors passage. Cell phone contracts can be very difficult to break, and are the most common communication device of choice, along with e-mail, of our young service members.

H.R. 6070  Military Spouses Residency Relief Act, amends the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act to guarantee the residency of spouses of military personnel.

As this is apparently a problem for some spouses, VVA generally favors the concept of this proposed legislation. Anything and everything that can be done to make the life and lot of military spouses a bit easier is something that VVA strongly favors, and the spouses (and the children and parents) also sacrifice much for our country.

H.R. 4255  United States Olympic Committee Paralympics Program Act of 2007, Authorizes the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to make a grant to the U.S. Olympic Committee (USOC) to plan, develop, manage, and implement the Paralympics Program for veterans and members of the Armed Forces. Directs the USOC to use a grant to recruit, support, encourage, schedule, facilitate, supervise, and implement paralympic instruction and competition activities, training and technical assistance, and coordination and program development activities for veterans and members of the Armed Forces with physical disabilities. Sets forth outreach, coordination, application, and memorandum of understanding requirements.

Regaining a sense of physical prowess has been proven to often carry over to all areas of one’s life for significantly disabled individuals, so investing in this sort of programs can increase the success of other programmatic programs for disabled veterans. Therefore VVA generally supports this bill, but as always, we believe that even in this case there must be built in accountability mechanisms to ensure that the intent is carried out effectively and efficiently, and that proper fiscal accounting is ensured.

H.R. 6221, Veteran-Owned Small Business Protection and Clarification Act of 2008, amends title 38, United States Code, requiring the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to include in each contract the Secretary enters for the acquisition of goods and services a provision that requires the contractee to comply with the contracting minimums and preferences for small business concerns owned or controlled by veterans, and for other purposes.

Vietnam Veterans of America (VVA) strongly favors this bill. We also urge that it be made clear to VA, and therefore to very large contractors like McKesson (which currently has a $3 Billion plus contract with VA with no or virtually no veteran or service disabled veteran owned subcontractors) that failure to comply will result in prohibiting the contractor from bidding on future contracts. Heretofore there has been little or no effort to monitor or ensure compliance with the 3% minimum sub-contracting requirement at VA (or elsewhere, for that matter).

Further, it needs to be made explicit in Title 38 and elsewhere in Federal law that information on sub-contracting is public information, and cannot under any circumstances be considered to be private, privileged, or proprietary information of prime contractors. This ruse has been used in the past to deny information on subcontracting by major Federal contractors to the service disabled veterans business owner community. After all, this is the public’s money, and the public has a right to know how, and with whom, it is spent.

H.R. 6224, Pilot College Work Study Programs for Veterans Act of 2008, directs the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to conduct a five-year pilot project to test the feasibility and advisability of expanding the scope of certain qualifying work-study activities under title 38, United States Code.

VVA favors this so-called pilot, as long as there is no “match” that has to be provided by the sponsoring academic or research entity, which would then allow the veteran to market themselves to the type of entity that will give them the best experience toward eventually reaching their career goals irrespective of ready “match” funds, usually one that is complementary to their course of study. The requirement under Federal Work Study Programs for an up to 25% match often serves as an impediment to the student securing the best possible assignment to further their future success.

Further, VVA can see no reason why this program cannot be taken nationwide after the first two years of successful operation. Lastly, there needs to be strict reporting guidelines so that the Congress can successfully fulfill your all-important oversight function expeditiously.

H.R. 6225 Injunctive Relief for Veterans Act of 2008, amends title 38, United States Code, relating to equitable relief with respect to a State or private employer.

VVA salutes you, Madam Chairwoman, for moving to strengthen protections of employment for mobilized servicemembers. While incentives and education of employers has proven to be the best strategy for gaining general compliance, the lack real sanction measures that will be respected by recalcitrant or unscrupulous employers has long been a significant weakness in the law. You are to be congratulated for taking action to “put more teeth” into enforcement of this vital program.

Having noted that we favor this initiative, VVA also suggests to the Committee that there is not enough staff at the Veterans Employment & Training Service (VETS) of the United States Department of Labor (USDOL) who are adequately trained and supervised to do proper investigations regarding re-employment. VVA would hope that the Appropriations Committee would add to the number of VETS staff and to the VETS training budget enough additional resources to close this gap between what needs to be done and what is now happening in many states.

VVA further suggests that a very small percentage of businesses are bearing a disproportionate share of the burden of paying for these wars in which we are currently engaged, in that they are the ones who DO support their employees who are also Guard and Reserve members when they are deployed. These employers pay the cost of lost productivity, the cost of hiring and training a temporary employee while the Guard member or reservist is on active duty, and in many cases the cost of re-training the returning servicemember whose skills have become outdated and the cost of helping that person readjust to civilian life again.

Therefore, VVA strongly urges the Congress to consider two options: First, to provide tax incentives for those employers who have Guard and Reservists on their payroll who are activated for the proportional number of months in a given year that their employee was away; and, two, to make available training dollars through USDOL to both train the temporary replacement worker and the returning service member when they come back to the job. These two measures together would materially strengthen the support for the National Guard and Reserves from the employer community, but we believe it would greatly reduce the number of problems with re-employment rights, therefore reducing the number of complaints dramatically.

What we are really suggesting is that we look to better educate the employers as to what is their responsibility under the USERRA law BEFORE there is a problem and everyone gets emotional, but also that the employers’ perspective and needs should be taken into account. Frankly, VVA believes that providing real incentive for voluntary compliance will prove to be far more effective than any or all enforcement efforts.

Essentially we are urging that at the same time as you move to “strengthen the stick” to try and ensure better compliance, VVA thinks that much more needs to be done to “sweeten the carrot” that will provide real incentives for private sector employers to comply.

H.R. 6272, SMOCTA Reauthorization Act of 2008, authorizes discretionary appropriations to carry out the Service Members Occupational Conversion and Training Act of 1992.

Although this is the last bill on which we comment in this statement, this is one of the most important bills to assist disabled and separating veterans that Congress will consider this year. VVA has held for thirty years that the nexus or central event in the readjustment process is assisting veterans to come to the point where each can obtain and sustain meaningful employment at a living wage. While a decent job will not solve their PTSD or TBI or blindness or other problems stemming directly from their service to country in the military, it will go a long way toward ameliorating those problems and making them more likely to be overcome.

In 1982 this Committee created what was then known as the “Emergency Veterans Job Training Act” (EVJTA) as a tool to assist Vietnam and disabled veterans to obtain employment. It was created largely in response to very high unemployment rates of veterans in the recession of 1982-83. While there were some significant problems with initial implementation (caused mostly by David Stockman and the Office of Management & Budget trying to sabotage the program), the program created a significant tool that was utilized by Disabled Veteran Outreach Program (DVOP) personnel and others to create job positions for veterans that would not have otherwise existed. The program was so successful that it was renewed several years later. And the term “emergency” was dropped, making it the Veterans Job Training Act (VJTA).

The VJTA was also a very successful program, and was highly valued by both employers and by veteran advocates who were able to use it to “get their foot through the door” to speak with employers regarding strong candidates whom they were trying to “market” to employers. Unfortunately, this program was allowed to lapse to the dismay of veteran advocates and many in the employment placement community.

There was enough of a clamor for a VJTA type of placement tool during the downsizing of the military following the victory of the United States in the Cold War and the dissolution of the Soviet empire that the Congress created the Service Members Occupational Conversion & Training Act (SMOCTA). Essentially SMOCTA was a re-packaged version of the earlier VJTA program. Despite the unfortunate acronym, this program was very successful and resulted in many veterans obtaining decent jobs that led into successful careers. Once again, after the perceived crisis had passed the veterans community and our advocates on this distinguished Committee were successful in securing the renewal of the authority for the program, but never succeeded in obtaining the appropriations necessary to operate this worthy employer incentive program.

Today there is another perceived crisis in regard to the difficulties of returning Global War on Terror (GWOT) warriors in obtaining decent jobs. This problem is real for many, especially those who return disabled, those in combat arms with no immediately convertible secondary MOS or prior civilian credentialed skills, and those from very rural or other areas where job opportunities are few. While VVA strongly favors early enactment of H.R. 6272 and immediate full funding of this program, VVA does urge that this not be another “flash in the pan” that will disappear after the perceived immediate crisis no longer is in the media headlines. Such a tool is something that is needed to assist many veterans to get the type of work that will sustain these veterans and their families, and in more cases than not turn into viable careers for these individuals.

I would be remiss if I did not note that the primary service delivery mechanism for ensuring widespread usage of this important tool is still significantly compromised, if indeed not broken. There simply must be significantly greater and much more meaningful accountability measures imposed on the state workforce development systems regarding the DVOP and the Local Veterans Employment Representative (LVER) grants programs, or the entire structure needs to be federalized and the DVOP/LVER staff put under direct and immediate control of the USDOL-VETS state directors. And then those state directors held accountable for overall performance in each state.)  We hope that even at this late date in the 110th Congress that you and your distinguished colleagues will embark on a serious dialogue with all stakeholders concerned in order to take meaningful action in this regard, this year.

Vietnam Veterans of America (VVA) thanks you for the opportunity to appear here to today to offer our thoughts and views on these vital veterans’ issues. I will be pleased to answer any questions that the Committee may have.

TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT GUIDANCE LETTER NO. 20-06

1. Purpose. To announce the reauthorization of the Work Opportunity Tax Credit Program under the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-432) and provide procedural guidance to the states for processing requests for certification under the amended program.

2. References. The Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-432); Working Families Tax Relief Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-311); Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) No. 14-05, dated February 9,2006; Internal Revenue Code (IRC) of 1986, Sections 51 and 51A, as amended; Employment and Training Administration (ETA) Handbook No. 408, Third Edition, November 2002 (the Handbook); and the May 2005 Addendum to the Handbook.

3. Background. Legislative authority for the WOTC program and the Welfare-to-Work Tax Credit (WtWTC) expired December 31,2005. Congress has reauthorized and extended the WOTC program through December 31,2007. Congress has also modified certain provisions with respect to individuals who begin work for an employer after December 31, 2006.

4. Authorization. The Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-432) was signed into law on December 20,2006. Section 105 of the Act provides a two-year extension of the WOTC program through December 31, 2007, effective retroactively to January 1, 2006.

In addition, the following statutory changes apply with respect to individuals who begin work for employers on or after January 1,2007:

• The earnings test for ex-felons is eliminated;
• The maximum age for food stamp recipients is increased;
• The certification request filing deadline is increased; and
• The WtWTC provisions are merged into the WOTC

Explanation of Specific Statutory Amendments and Provisions. Section 105 of the Act:

1. Amends the statutory definitions of two WOTC target groups in IRC Section 51 as follows:

1. Ex-Felons - removes economic eligibility determination based on family income.
2. Food Stamp Recipients - increases eligibility age from 18-25 to 18-40.

2. Extends the certification request filing date from 21 to 28 days after the new hire begins work for the employer.

3. Repeals IRC Section 51A by merging the WtWTC into the WOTC and creating a new WOTC target group I, entitled "Long-term family assistance recipient." The new target group retains the statutory definition and the more generous tax credit provisions over a two-year period of the former WtWTC With respect to this target group only:

• First-year WOTC is increased from 35 to 40 percent of qualified first-year wages, which are capped at $10,000.
• Second-year WOTC is retained at 50 percent of qualified second-year wages, again capped at $10,000 for a maximum two-year credit of $9,000.
• Wages taken into consideration are calculated in the same manner as for the other WOTC target groups. Therefore, wages no longer include certain amounts excludable from the recipient's gross income.
• The minimum employment or retention period is calculated in the same manner as for the WOTC Therefore, the 180 days of service formerly required for certified WtWTC employees no longer applies to this target group under the consolidated WOTC Note: For the other adult target groups (except Summer Youth), "the 40-percent rate applies to qualified first-year wages only if the employee works at least 400 hours or more. If the employee works at least 120 hours, but fewer than 400 hours, the credit is 25 percent of qualified first-year wages capped at $6,000 ($3,000 for Summer Youth)."

5. Program Administration. Under the reauthorizing legislation, state workforce agencies' (SW As) certification and program operation responsibilities for the consolidated WOTC program remain the same as those described in the Handbook and the May 2005 Addendum to the Handbook. These include procedures for: (a) determining target group eligibility and issuing certifications and denials; (b) establishing working partnerships with different participating agencies at the state and local levels for resolving technical issues and issuing conditional certifications; (c) conducting verification activities; (d) complying with quarterly report responsibilities; and (e) records retention.

6. IRS Form 8850. IRS Form 8850, Pre-Screening Notice and Certification Request for the Work Opportunity Credit, and the instructions for Form 8850 have been revised. The February 2007 revised form and instructions are available at www.irs.gov.

SW As are reminded of the guidance provided in Announcement 2002-44, "Electronic Submission of Form 8850," contained in the IRS' Internal Revenue Bulletin (IRB) No. 2002-17, published on April 29, 2002. This announcement describes the requirements that must be met should SW As choose to establish systems to accept electronic submission of IRS Form 8850. The text of Announcement 2002-44 is available at http://www.uses.doleta.gov/pdf/Appendix IV/Appendix IV 3 Announcement 2002-44.pdf.

7. Reporting Authority. Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has extended the information collection requested for the WOTC/WtWTC administrative and streamlined reporting form without changes. ETA Form 9058 - Report 1 and ETA administrative forms 9057,9059,9061- 9063, and 9065 are approved under OMB No. 1205-0371 through August 31, 2009. SW As should continue to use the current certification and reporting forms until further notice. A package including revised reporting and administrative forms, updates to the May 2005, Addendum to the Handbook, a new Fourth Edition of ETA Handbook 408, a Fact Sheet "Employers: 9 ways to Earn Federal Income Tax Credits for Your Company," and a revised Technical Assistance and Compliance Review Guide will be submitted to OMB for clearance. Training on WOTC program amendments, provisions, and new reporting and administrative forms is being planned and will be provided through webinars.

8. Action Required. SW A administrators are requested to:

1. Provide this information to appropriate program staff, employers and their representatives, participating agencies, and other interested partners. They are to ensure that the SW As and participating agencies administer the WOTC in accordance with the guidance provided in the Handbook; the May 2005 Addendum to the Handbook; and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, Section 51, as amended.
2. Ensure that State WOTC Coordinators receive a copy of the new legislation. Title I, Section 105 of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-432) is available at http:// thomas.1oc.gov /home/ thomas2.html.

9. Inquiries. Direct all questions to the appropriate Regional WOTC Coordinator.

TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT GUIDANCE LETTER NO. 5-07

1. Purpose. The purpose of this guidance is to announce the reauthorization of the Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC) Program under the Small Business and Work Opportunity Tax Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-28) and provide procedural guidance to the states for processing requests for certifications under the consolidated program.

2. References. The Small Business and Work Opportunity Tax Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-28); Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-432); Working Families Tax Relief Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-311); Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) No. 20-06, dated April 7, 2007; Internal Revenue Code (IRC) of 1986, Section 51, as amended; Employment and Training Administration (ETA) Handbook No. 408, Third Edition, November 2002 (the Handbook); and the May 2005 Addendum to the Handbook.

3. Background. On December 20, 2006, the President signed into law the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-432). This legislation not only extended the WOTC Program (retroactively to January 1, 2006) through December 31, 2007, but also merged the Welfare-to-Work Tax Credit (WtWTC) into WOTC and repealed permanently Section 51(A) of the IRC. Congress also amended certain statutory definitions with respect to new hires that began to work for an employer after December 31, 2006. For additional information, see TEGL No. 20-06, dated April 3, 2007.

4. Authorization. The Small Business and Work Opportunity Tax Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-28) was signed into law on May 25, 2007. Section 8211 of the Act provides a 44-month extension of the WOTC Program through August 31, 2011.

Explanation of Specific Statutory Amendments and Provisions. Section 8211 of the Act:

1. Renames the High-Risk Youth group (D) and calls it Designated Community Resident (DCR).

2. Amends the statutory definition of a DCR to mean an individual certified by the state workforce agency (SWA) as having:

• attained age 18 but not 40 on the hiring date, and
• his/her principal place of abode within an Empowerment Zone (EZ), Renewal Community (RC), or Rural Renewal County (RRC).

Eligibility Determination of DCRs. Eligibility determination of a new hire as a member of the DCR target group involves verification of the following two requirements: 1) age; and 2) location of the individual’s principal place of abode [residence] in an EZ, RC, or RRC. Age should be verified by looking at documents submitted by the employers/consultants with the request or requiring from employers one or several of the recommended documents in Section E.

Examples of Documentary Evidence., p. VII-32 of the November 2002, Third Edition, ETA Handbook 408. Verifying the residential location of a potential DCR as in an EZ, RC, or RRC requires reviewing the instructions for IRS Form 8850. EZs, RCs and RRCs are all listed in these IRS instructions. SWAs can verify whether a DCR’s address is located in a Rural Renewal County on-line by visiting the following Web site at: www.usps.gov and following these simple steps: 1) click on Find a ZIP Code; 2) enter and submit the Address and ZIP Code; and 3) click on Mailing Industry Information. SWAs should download and print the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) Mailing Industry Information sheet, and keep a copy in the case file of the new hire, employer, or consultant.

3. Limits “qualified wages” for Designated Community Residents to those paid for services performed while the individual is residing in an EZ, RC, or RRC.

4. Defines a Rural Renewal County as a county that:

• is outside a metropolitan statistical area (MSA) as defined by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB); and
• during the five-year periods, 1990 through 1994, and 1995 through 1999, had a net population loss.

5. Clarifies that “ticket holders” are included in the vocational rehabilitation referral target group by adding at the end of its statutory definition the following clause:

• an individual work plan developed and implemented by an Employment Network pursuant to Subsection (g) of Section 1148 of the Social Security Act with respect to which the requirements of such Subsection are met.

6. Expands the definition of the “Qualified Veteran” target group to include “disabled veterans” who are entitled to compensation for a service-connected disability and:

• have a hiring date which is not more than one year after having been discharged or released from active duty in the Armed Forces of the United States; or
• have aggregate periods of unemployment during the one-year period ending on the hiring date that equal or exceed six months.

7. Defines the terms “compensation” and “service connected” as having the meanings under Section 101 of Title 38 of the United States Code, pertaining to veterans benefits as follows:

• Section 101(13) defines “compensation” as a monthly payment made by the Secretary to a veteran because of a service-connected disability; and
• Section 101(16) defines “service-connected,” with respect to a disability, as meaning that the disability was incurred or aggravated in the line of duty in the active military, naval, or air service.

8. Increases the amount of “qualified wages,” for disabled veterans only, from $6,000 to $12,000.

5. Program Administration. Under the reauthorizing legislation, SWAs certification and program operation responsibilities for the consolidated WOTC program remain the same as those described in the November 2002, Third Edition of ETA Handbook 408 and the May 2005 Addendum. These include procedures for: a) determining target group eligibility and issuing certifications and denials; b) establishing working partnerships with different participating agencies at the state and local levels for resolving technical issues and issuing conditional certifications; c) conducting verification activities; d) complying with quarterly report responsibilities; and e) complying with records’ retention time periods.

6. IRS Form 8850. IRS Form 8850, Pre-Screening Notice (PSN) and Certification Request for the Work Opportunity Credit, and the instructions for this form have been revised. The June 2007, PSN form and its instructions are available at www.irs.gov.

6. Funding. ETA issued Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 funding advances from Continuing Resolutions (CRs) to the SWAs for WOTC Program implementation and elimination of existing backlogs. The CR advances covered activities through February 15, 2007. Funding for the merged WOTC Program was passed as part of the FY 2007 funds appropriated in the Revised Continuing Appropriations Resolution Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-5).

7. Reporting Authority. Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act, OMB extended the information collection requested for the WOTC/WtWTC administrative and reporting forms without substantial changes.  ETA Form 9058 - Report 1 and administrative forms 9057, 9059, 9061 - 9063,  and 9065 are approved under OMB No. 1205-0371 through August 31, 2009. SWAs should continue to use the current certification and reporting forms until further notice. A package including revised reporting and administrative forms, the Spanish versions of IRS Form 8850 and ETA Form 9061, the revised May 2005 Addendum to ETA Handbook 408 (the Handbook), and a revised Technical Assistance and Compliance Review Guide will be submitted to OMB for emergency clearance. Training on WOTC program amendments, provisions, and new reporting and administrative requirements is being planned and will be provided.

8. Action Required. SWA administrators are requested to:

1. Provide this information to appropriate program staff, employers, and their representatives, participating agencies (PAs), and other interested partners. They are to ensure that the SWAs and PAs administer the WOTC in accordance with the guidance provided in this TEGL, the Handbook, the May 2005 Addendum to the Handbook, and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, Section 51, as amended; and

2. Ensure that state coordinators receive a copy of the new legislation, Title VIII, Part I., Subpart A., Section 8211 of the Small Business and Work Opportunity Tax Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-28) available at http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas2.html.

9. Inquiries. Direct all questions to the appropriate Regional Coordinator.