Revision to the Title IV-D State Plan Preprint on Computerized Support Enforcement Systems

ACTION TRANSMITTAL

OCSE-AT-96-08

November 12, 1996

TO:STATE AGENCIES ADMINISTERING CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT PLANS UNDER TITLE IV-D OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT AND OTHER INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS

SUBJECT:Revision to the Title IV-D State Plan Preprint; Submission of State Plan Page to Indicate Compliance with Federal Requirements on Computerized Support Enforcement Systems

BACKGROUND:Section 123 of P. L. 100-485, the Family Support Act of 1988, added section 454(24)(B) of the Social Security Act (the Act) to require each State to have a certified operational computerized support enforcement system by October 1, 1995. In addition, P.L. 104-35 amended section 454(24)(B) of the Act extending the deadline for having a certified operational computerized support enforcement system, by two years to October 1, 1997.

ATTACHMENT:Attached is a new State plan preprint page which reflects changes made to the State plan provisions of title IV-D of the Act by section 344(a) of P.L. 104-193, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 which amended section 454(24) of the Act to require each State to have in effect by October 1, 1997 a computerized support enforcement system that meets all requirements enacted on or before the date of enactment of the Family Support Act. The page on computerized support enforcement systems must be submitted no later than December 31, 1997.

The attachment consists of:

Section 3.8, Computerized Support Enforcement Systems, provides that the State has in effect by October 1, 1997 an operational computerized support enforcement system in accordance with 302.85(a) except that the date is no longer operable. Therefore, States should follow the statute for effective date until regulations are reissued. Page 3.8-2 is added to reflect the requirement to have an operationalcomputerized support enforcement system, including changes made by P.L. 104-35 which extends the deadline from October 1, 1995 to October 1, 1997 by which the State must have in effect, an operational computerized support enforcement system meeting all Federal requirements.

APPROVAL OF STATE PLAN

States must submit page 3.8-2, Computerized Support Enforcement System, no later than December 31, 1997, along with a completed transmittal notice form (OCSE-21-U4) to the appropriate ACF Regional Administrator attesting to compliance with the requirements set forth on the page.

RELATED

REFERENCES: OCSE-AT-91-10 and OCSE-AT-96-02.

ACTION

REQUIRED:Submit page 3.8-2 no later than December 31, 1997.

INQUIRIES

TO:ACF Regional Administrators

________________________

David Gray Ross

Deputy Director

Office of Child Support

Enforcement

State_______________

Citation 3.8 Computerized Support Enforcement System

454(16) and (24) 2By October 1, 1997, the State has

of the Act in effect an operational computerized support enforcement system in accordance with õ454(16) and (24).

TN#__________Approval Date_____________Effective Date____________

3.8-2

DATE:November 12, 1996

TO: ACF Regional Administrators

Regions I - X

FROM: David Gray Ross

Deputy Director

Office of Child Support Enforcement

SUBJECT: State Plan Preprint Page for Implementation of Computerized Support Enforcement System

In the attached Action Transmittal (OCSE-AT-9608), we are sending the States a new State plan preprint page for the requirement to have an operational Computerized Support Enforcement System by October 1, 1997. There is no Legislative/Regulatory Analysis checklist covering this requirement.

P. L. 100-485 added a new section 454(24)(B) of the Social Security Act (the Act) to require each State to have a certified operational computerized support enforcement system by October 1, 1995, and P. L. 104-35 extended the deadline for a certified system by two years to October 1, 1997. This new State plan preprint page is based on P.L. 104-193 which amended section 454(24) of the Act to require each State to have in effect by October 1, 1997 a computerized support enforcement system that meets all requirements enacted on or before the enactment of the Family Support Act. States must submit State plan preprint page 3.8-2 by December 31, 1997, attesting to compliance with the requirement for an operational Computerized Support Enforcement System. Failure of a State to submit an approvable amendment to its State plan certifying compliance with this requirement would constitute grounds for disapproval of its IV-D State plan.

Although final regulations to implement the revised computerized support enforcement provisions have not been published, page 3.8-2, Computerized Support Enforcement System must be submitted for final approval since there are no State laws required to meet this requirement. Regional Administrators will determine whether to grant final approval or recommend disapproval of the State plan amendments. Regional Counsel review of the plan amendment is not necessary.

Action Required

Each Regional Office review of States' submissions should result in reaching one of two conclusions:

1. Recommendation for Approval of the State Plan - If the State's submission for computerized support enforcement systems indicates that the State has an operational computerized support enforcement system, the region should approve the State plan preprint page.

2. Recommendation for Disapproval of the State plan - Should the State fail to submit the required State plan material by December 31, 1997 regarding operational computerized support enforcement systems, you should send a recommendation of disapproval to Central Office and notify the State, after consultation with Central Office, that you are recommending to the Director, OCSE, disapproval of its State plan including the reasons such a recommendation is necessary. The State should be advised that OCSE will follow the process set forth in OCSE-AT-86-21. States should receive notice of our intent to disapprove as soon as the Regional and Central Office have taken all steps necessary to conclude that for the computerized support enforcement provisions, the State does not have an operational system which meets all Federal requirements.