Employment and Training Administration
Washington, D. C. 20210






May 29, 1998




May 31, 1999











Unemployment Insurance Service




Elimination of the Interstate Continued Claim, Form IB-2


  1. Purpose.  To advise State Employment Security Agencies (SESAs) of the elimination of the Interstate Continued Claim, Form IB-2, and to provide agent State instructions for providing weeks claimed information to liable States on backdated initial claims.

  2. References. ET Handbooks Nos. 392 and 399; Interstate Connection (ICON) User Guide.

  3. Background. Prior to implementation of the interstate weeks claimed by-pass procedures in 1983, the Interstate Continued Claim, Form IB-2, was the only method used to certify for a week claimed under the Interstate Benefit Payment Plan. During those earlier years, most States operated under local office in-person reporting procedures that accommodated the use of this form.

    When the by-pass procedures were implemented, interstate claimants began filing for weeks claimed directly with their liable States, using certification forms provided by the liable State, thereby eliminating the major use of the Form IB-2. For the most part, the Form IB-2 has continued to be issued to claimants only: (1) at the time of an initial claim filed against some (currently 18) liable States; (2) as a replacement for missing certification forms, except in those instances when the liable State has requested that it not be issued for this purpose; and (3) for weeks claimed certifications on backdated interstate initial claims.

    As of January 1998, eight States were operational for remote interstate agent initial claimstaking. These agent States must mail the Form IB-2 to claimants filing against liable States that continue to request the issuance of these forms at the time of the initial claim. This is a manual operation.

    There are 10 additional States with remote initial claimstaking partially implemented or in pilot test status (an additional 27 States are in the planning stage). The 18 States (AK, CA, CO, FL, ID, MD, MA, ME, MO, MT, NY, OH, PA, RI, SD, TX, UT, WI) that have fully implemented, partially implemented, or are testing remote initial claimstaking represent 48.5 percent of the total agent and 44.4 percent of the total liable claims filed. By the end of 1998, it is likely that most of these States will be fully operational Statewide for interstate agent and remote liable initial claimstaking. This changing claimstaking environment will further diminish the use of the Form IB-2. Its continued use at the point of the initial claim, including backdated claims, will be cumbersome under remote initial claimstaking procedures.

    Therefore, the Interstate Conference of Employment Security Agencies' Interstate Benefit Committee has considered the cost and benefit of maintaining the Form IB-2. States have been advised of the various considerations addressed by the Committee pertaining to the use of the Form IB-2 through the distribution of the minutes from Committee meetings, discussions at the National Interstate Meeting, the National UI Directors and Legal Affairs Meeting, and a letter from the Chairman of the Committee to each State Director dated January 23, 1998. The Committee has reached a final decision to eliminate the Form IB-2. The decision is effective for claims filed on and after July 6, 1998. This means liable States will be responsible for providing interstate claimants with a method to file for all weeks claimed, including backdated claims, filed July 6, 1998, and thereafter.

    Few States objected to the elimination of the Form IB-2. The general concerns expressed were: (1) equal treatment of interstate claimants; (2) the effect on a State's ability to meet the First Payment Promptness Standard; and (3) the effect on customer service since agent States use the form to provide assistance to claimants who are missing liable State claim forms.

  4. Discussion. Before April 1983, interstate claimants followed agent State reporting requirements and used standard interstate forms different from intrastate forms. Since 1983, interstate claimants have reported directly to liable States under liable State reporting requirements using forms or electronic methods of the liable States' choice. The elimination of the Form IB-2 is another means of streamlining the interstate system as it moves in the direction of using the ICON for all data exchanges between States. It does not raise an equal treatment issue. Nor does it affect the liable State's ability to treat interstate and intrastate claimants equally.

    With respect to the affect on first payment promptness, all States should be generating informational packets and reporting instructions, including certification forms if necessary, to each claimant upon the receipt of a telecommunicated interstate initial claim. If each State follows this procedure, it is believed that the elimination of the Form IB-2 will have no effect on the State's ability to comply with the First Payment Promptness Standard. Currently, 35 liable States follow procedures that provide interstate claimants with the necessary forms or an electronic filing method that begins with the first week claimed. With the elimination of the Form IB-2, the additional 17 States (AR, CT, DE, LA, MA, MI, MT, NV, NH, NJ, NY, OR, RI, SD, VT, WA, WY) that currently request the issuance of forms by the agent State must implement such procedures. There is no apparent reason why following such procedures would affect a liable State's ability to obtain timely certifications from interstate claimants. Six of these 17 States (CT, LA, MT, NJ, VT, WA,) are already handling interstate weeks claimed certifications electronically.

    The use of the Form IB-2 for customer service purposes has been helpful to some claimants. However, as more and more States move to call centers, the question is raised whether agent offices will continue to be conveniently located or accessible to provide this service. If they are not, the agent State would have to mail the form to the claimant. That being the case, it is best for the claimant to contact the liable State to request a form. Additionally, 36 States have already implemented electronic weeks claimed certifications, with 25 States using them for interstate claimants. Liable States that are still using paper forms should already have procedures in place to replace missing certification forms. Therefore, maintaining a standard form nationally for this purpose is not warranted.

  5. Procedures. Effective with claims filed on and after July 6, 1998, the following procedures should be implemented:



    ST:__ (Postal Abbreviation) Today's Date__/__/__ STAFF ID:__________________ For Add Info Call______________

    SSN:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Eff Date__/__/__ Bkdate Code____

    Name: (F)_______________(M)_ (L)_________________________

    Oth Name:(F)_______________(M)_ (L)_________________________


    City:________________ST:___ZIP:_____ ____TEL NO:___ ___ ____

    If Bkdate Code 5, Enter Date Wages Ret'd: __/__/__

    If Bkdate Code 6, Exp/Remks:___________________________________




    Weeks Claimed:

    __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__

    __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__

    __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__

    __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__

    __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__

    __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__

    Overpayment Amt:$________      PF3=Send  PF4=Cancel

  6. Action Required.  SESA administrators are requested to:

  7. Inquiries. Direct any questions to the appropriate Regional Office.