[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 20, Volume 3]
[Revised as of April 1, 2003]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 20CFR650.1]

[Page 415]
 
                      TITLE 20--EMPLOYEES' BENEFITS
 
 CHAPTER V--EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
 
PART 650--STANDARD FOR APPEALS PROMPTNESS--UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION--Table of Contents
 
Sec. 650.1  Nature and purpose of the standard.

    (a) This standard is responsive to the overriding concern of the 
U.S. Supreme Court in California Department of Human Resources v. Java, 
402 U.S. 121 (1971), and that of other courts with delay in payment of 
unemployment compensation to eligible individuals, including delays 
caused specifically by the adjudication process. The standard seeks to 
assure that all administrative appeals affecting benefit rights are 
heard and decided with the greatest promptness that is administratively 
feasible.
    (b) Sections 303(a) (1) and (3) of the Social Security Act require, 
as a condition for the receipt of granted funds, that State laws include 
provisions for methods of administration reasonably calculated to insure 
full payment of unemployment compensation when due, and opportunity for 
a fair hearing for all individuals whose claims for unemployment 
compensation are denied. The Secretary has construed these provisions to 
require, as a condition for receipt of granted funds, that State laws 
include provisions for hearing and deciding appeals for all unemployment 
insurance claimants who are parties to an administrative benefit appeal 
with the greatest promptness that is administratively feasible. What is 
the greatest promptness that is administratively feasible in an 
individual case depends on the facts and circumstances of that case. For 
example, the greatest promptness that is administratively feasible will 
be longer in cases that involve interstate appeals, complex issues of 
fact or law, reasonable requests by parties for continuances or 
rescheduling of hearings or other unforeseen and uncontrollable factors 
than it will be for other cases.
    (c) In addition, the Secretary has construed section 303(b)(2) of 
the Social Security Act as requiring States to comply substantially with 
the required provisions of State law. The Secretary considers as 
substantial compliance the issuance of minimum percentages of first 
level benefit appeal decisions within the periods of time specified in 
Sec. 650.4.
    (d) Although the interpretation of Federal law requirements in 
Sec. 650.3 below applies to both first and second level administrative 
benefit appeals, the criteria for review of State compliance in 
Sec. 650.3(b) apply only to first level benefit appeals.