10:87-11.1 Disqualification for intentional program violation--administrative responsibility

(a) The CSSA shall be responsible for investigating any case of alleged intentional program violation (IPV), and ensuring that appropriate cases are acted upon either through administrative disqualification hearings or referral to a court of appropriate jurisdiction in accordance with the procedures outlined in this subchapter. Administrative disqualification procedures or referral for prosecution action shall be initiated by the CSSA in cases in which the CSSA has sufficient documentary evidence to substantiate that an individual has intentionally made one or more acts of IPV as defined at N.J.A.C. 10:87-11.3(a). (b) If the CSSA does not initiate administrative disqualification procedures or refer for prosecution a case involving an overissuance caused by a suspected act of IPV, the CSSA shall take action to collect the overissuance by establishing an inadvertent household error claim against the household in accordance with procedures at N.J.A.C. 10:87-11.20(e)2. (c) The CSSA shall refer to the Division's Bureau of Administrative Review and Appeals administrative disqualification hearings cases in which the CSSA believes the facts of the individual case do not warrant civil or criminal prosecution through the appropriate court system, cases previously referred for prosecution that were declined by the appropriate legal authority, and previously referred cases where no action was taken within a reasonable period of time and the referral was formally withdrawn by the CSSA. (d) The CSSA shall not initiate an administrative disqualification hearing against an accused individual whose case is currently being referred for prosecution or subsequent to any action taken against the accused individual by the prosecutor or court of appropriate jurisdiction, if the factual issues of the case arise out of the same, or related, circumstances. (e) The CSSA may initiate administrative disqualification procedures or refer a case for prosecution regardless of the current eligibility of the individual. (f) When the CSSA refers the case to the prosecutor, the prosecutor has the option to proceed with a court procedure or deny the case. If the case is denied by the prosecutor, the client, in the prosecutor's presence, shall sign the Disqualification Consent Agreement (DCA) in accordance with N.J.A.C. 10:87-11.5. The DCA notifies the client of the penalties involved when committing an IPV and by signing the DCA, the client acknowledges his or her understanding of those conditions. 1. After the case has been denied by the prosecutor, the case reverts back to the CSSA which provides the client the option to proceed with an administrative disqualification hearing (ADH) or to sign an ADH waiver that waives his or her right to a hearing in accordance with N.J.A.C. 10:87-11.5. History HISTORY: Amended by R.1989 d.121, effective February 21, 1989. See: 20 N.J.R. 2689(a), 21 N.J.R. 511(b). Recodified (a)1.-3. as (b)-(d). Amended by R.1998 d.498, effective October 5, 1998. See: 30 N.J.R. 1928(a), 30 N.J.R. 3669(b). In (a), increased the ineligibility period from six to 12 months for first violations and from 12 to 24 months for second violations; and added (e) through (i). Repeal and New Rule, R.2004 d.181, effective May 17, 2004. See: 36 N.J.R. 28(a), 36 N.J.R. 2425(a). Section was "Intentional program violation disqualification". Amended by R.2009 d.94, effective March 16, 2009. See: 40 N.J.R. 5932(a), 41 N.J.R. 1245(b). Rewrote (f).