Proposed Rule

62280

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
8 CFR Parts 103, 106, 204, 211, 212,
214, 216, 223, 235, 236, 240, 244, 245,
245a, 248, 264, 274a, 301, 319, 320, 322,
324, 334, 341, 343a, 343b, and 392
[CIS No. 2627–18; DHS Docket No. USCIS–
2019–0010]
RIN 1615–AC18

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services Fee Schedule and Changes to
Certain Other Immigration Benefit
Request Requirements
U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:

The Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) proposes to adjust
certain immigration and naturalization
benefit request fees charged by U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services
(USCIS). USCIS conducted a
comprehensive biennial fee review and
determined that current fees do not
recover the full costs of providing
adjudication and naturalization
services. DHS proposes to adjust USCIS
fees by a weighted average increase of
21 percent, add new fees for certain
benefit requests, establish multiple fees
for petitions for nonimmigrant workers,
and limit the number of beneficiaries on
certain forms to ensure that USCIS has
the resources it needs to provide
adequate service to applicants and
petitioners. Adjustments to the fee
schedule are necessary to recover the
full operating costs associated with
administering the nation’s immigration
benefits system, safeguarding its
integrity, and efficiently and fairly
adjudicating immigration benefit
requests, while protecting Americans,
securing the homeland, and honoring
our country’s values. USCIS also is
proposing changes to certain other
immigration benefit request
requirements.
DATES: Written comments must be
submitted on or before December 16,
2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by DHS Docket No. USCIS–
2019–0010, by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow this site’s
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Samantha Deshommes, Chief,
Regulatory Coordination Division,
Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services,
Department of Homeland Security, 20
Massachusetts Avenue NW, Mailstop

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

SUMMARY:

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

#2140, Washington, DC 20529–2140. To
ensure proper handling, please
reference DHS Docket No. USCIS–2019–
0010 in your correspondence. Mail must
be postmarked by the comment
submission deadline. Please note that
USCIS cannot accept any comments that
are hand delivered or couriered. In
addition, USCIS cannot accept mailed
comments contained on any form of
digital media storage devices, such as
CDs/DVDs and USB drives.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kika
M. Scott, Deputy Chief Financial
Officer, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of
Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20529–
2130, telephone (202) 272–8377.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Public Participation
II. Executive Summary
A. Effective Date
III. Basis for the Fee Review
A. Legal Authority and Guidance
B. Full Cost Recovery
C. Immigration Examinations Fee Account
D. Fee Review History
IV. FY 2019/2020 Immigration Examinations
Fee Account Fee Review
A. USCIS Projected Costs and Revenue
1. Cost Projections
a. Use IEFA Fee Collections To Fund
Immigration Adjudication Services
Performed by ICE
2. Revenue Projections
3. Cost and Revenue Differential
B. Methodology
1. Volume
a. Workload Volume and Volume
Projection Committee
b. Fee-Paying Volume
2. Completion Rates
3. Assessing Proposed Fees
C. Fee-Related Issues Noted for
Consideration
1. Accommodating E-Filing and Form
Flexibility
2. Processing Time Outlook
V. Proposed Changes in the FY 2019/2020
Fee Schedule
A. Clarify Dishonored Fee Check RePresentment Requirement
B. Eliminate $30 Returned Check Fee
C. Fee Waivers
1. Background
2. Cost of Fee Waivers
3. Proposed Fee Waiver Changes
a. Limits on Eligible Forms and Categories
b. Eligibility Requirements
c. Income Requirements
d. Subject to INA Section 212(a)(4) and
Affidavit of Support Requirements
e. USCIS Director’s Discretionary Fee
Waivers and Emergency and Disaster
Relief
f. Conforming Edits and Request for
Comments
D. Fee Exemptions
1. Form I–765 Exemption Related to
Asylees and Refugees

PO 00000

Frm 00002

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

2. Exemptions Related to International
Organization Officers and to Agreement
Between the U.S. Government and Other
Nations
3. Exemptions Related to VAWA and to T
and U Nonimmigrant Status Categories
E. Changes to Biometric Services Fee
1. Incorporating Biometric Activities Into
Immigration Benefit Request Fees
2. Retaining a Separate Biometric Services
Fee for Temporary Protective Status
3. Executive Office for Immigration Review
(EOIR) Biometric Services Fee
F. Form I–485, Application To Register
Permanent Residence or Adjust Status
1. Interim Benefits
2. Form I–485 Fee for Child Under 14,
Filing With Parent
G. Continuing To Hold Refugee Travel
Document Fee to the Department of State
Passport Fee
H. Form I–131A, Carrier Documentation
I. Separating Form I–129, Petition for a
Nonimmigrant Worker, Into Different
Forms
1. Form I–129H1, Petition for
Nonimmigrant Worker: H–1B or H–1B1
Classifications
2. Forms I–129H2A and I–129H2B,
Petitions for H–2A and H–2B Workers
3. Form I–129L, Petition for Nonimmigrant
Worker: L Classification
4. Form I–129O Petition for Nonimmigrant
Worker: O Classification
5. Form I–129E&TN, Application for
Nonimmigrant Worker: E and TN
Classification
6. Form I–129MISC, Petition for
Nonimmigrant Worker: H–3, P, Q, or R
Classification
7. Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands (CNMI) Fees
J. Premium Processing
1. Change Premium Processing Fee by
Guidance
2. Change Calendar Days to Business Days
3. Actions That End or Restart the 15-Day
Period
4. Expedited Processing for Other Requests
K. Regional Centers
L. Secure Mail Initiative
M. Intercountry Adoptions
1. Adjustment to Proposed Fees for Certain
Intercountry Adoption-Specific Forms
2. Clarification of Fee Exception for Birth
Siblings
3. Suitability and Eligibility Approval
Validity Period
4. Form I–600A/I–600 Supplement 3,
Request for Action on Approved Form I–
600A/I–600
a. Suitability & Eligibility Extensions
b. New Approval Notices
c. Change of Country
d. Hague Adoption Convention Transition
Cases
5. Form I–800A, Supplement 3, Request for
Action on Approved Form I–800A
N. Changes to Genealogy Search and
Records Requests
O. Naturalization and Citizenship Related
Forms
1. No Longer Limit the Form N–400 Fee
2. Remove Form N–400 Reduced Fee
3. Military Naturalization and Certificates
of Citizenship

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
4. Proposed Changes to Other
Naturalization-Related Application and
Certificate of Citizenship Application
Fees
P. Asylum Fees
1. Fee for Form I–589, Application for
Asylum and for Withholding of Removal
2. Fee for the Initial Application for
Employment Authorization While an
Asylum Claim Is Pending
Q. DACA Renewal Fees
R. Fees Shared by CBP and USCIS
S. 9–11 Response and Biometric Entry-Exit
Fee for H–1B and L–1 Visas
T. Form I–881, Application for Suspension
of Deportation or Special Rule
Cancellation of Removal (Pursuant to
Section 203 of Pub. L. 105–100
(NACARA))
U. Miscellaneous Technical and
Procedural Changes
VI. Proposed Fee Adjustments to IEFA
Immigration Benefits
VII. Other Possible Fee Scenarios
A. Fee Schedule With DACA Renewal Fees
B. Fee Schedule Without DACA Fees
C. Fee Schedule With Both DACA Initial
and Renewal Fees
VIII. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
D. Congressional Review Act
E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
F. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice
Reform)
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
H. National Environmental Policy Act

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
ABC Activity-Based Costing
ASC Application Support Center
BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
CAT Convention Against Torture and Other
Cruel, Unusual or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment
CBP U.S. Customs and Border Protection
CEQ Council on Environmental Quality
CFO Chief Financial Officer
CNMI Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands
CPI Consumer Price Index
CPI–U Consumer Price Index for All Urban
Consumers
DACA Deferred Action for Childhood
Arrivals
DHS Department of Homeland Security
DOD Department of Defense
DOJ Department of Justice
DOL Department of Labor
DOS Department of State
EAD Employment Authorization Document
EB–5 Employment-Based Immigrant Visa,
Fifth Preference
EIN Employer Identification Number
EOIR Executive Office for Immigration
Review
FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation
FY Fiscal Year
GAO Government Accountability Office
HHS U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services
IEFA Immigration Examinations Fee
Account
INA Immigration and Nationality Act of
1952

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

INS Immigration and Naturalization Service
IPO Investor Program Office
IOAA Independent Offices Appropriations
Act
LIFE Act Legal Immigration Family Equity
Act
LPR Lawful Permanent Resident
NACARA Nicaraguan Adjustment and
Central American Relief Act
NAICS North American Industry
Classification System
NBC National Benefits Center
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NOID Notice of Intent to Deny
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
OIG DHS Office of the Inspector General
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OPQ Office of Performance and Quality
PRC Permanent Resident Card
RAIO Refugee, Asylum, and International
Operations Directorate
RFE Request for Evidence
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
SAVE Systematic Alien Verification for
Entitlements
SBA Small Business Administration
TPS Temporary Protected Status
TVPRA William Wilberforce Trafficking
Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of
2008
UAC Unaccompanied Alien Child
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
USCIS U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services
VPC Volume Projection Committee

I. Public Participation
DHS invites you to participate in this
rulemaking by submitting written data,
views, or arguments on all aspects of
this proposed rule. Comments providing
the most assistance to DHS will
reference a specific portion of the
proposed rule, explain the reason for
any recommended change, and include
data, information, or authority that
supports the recommended change.
Instructions: All submissions should
include the agency name and DHS
Docket No. USCIS–2019–0010 for this
rulemaking. Providing comments is
entirely voluntary. Regardless of how
you submit your comment, DHS will
post all submissions, without change, to
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
http://www.regulations.gov and will
include any personal information you
provide. Because the information you
submit will be publicly available, you
should consider limiting the amount of
personal information in your
submission. DHS may withhold
information provided in comments from
public viewing if it determines that such
information is offensive or may affect
the privacy of an individual. For
additional information, please read the
Privacy Act notice available through the
link in the footer of http://
www.regulations.gov.
Docket: For access to the docket, go to
http://www.regulations.gov and enter

PO 00000

Frm 00003

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62281

this rulemaking’s eDocket number:
USCIS–2019–0010. The docket includes
additional documents that support the
analysis contained in this proposed rule
to determine the specific fees that are
proposed. These documents include:
• Fiscal Year (FY) 2019/2020
Immigration Examinations Fee Account
Fee Review Supporting Documentation;
• Regulatory Impact Analysis: U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services
Fee Schedule and Changes to Certain
Other Immigration Benefit Request
Requirements; and
• Small Entity Analysis for
Adjustment of the U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services Fee Schedule
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
You may review these documents on
the electronic docket. The software 1
used to compute the immigration
benefit request fees 2 and biometric
fees 3 is a commercial product licensed
to USCIS that may be accessed on-site,
by appointment, by calling (202) 272–
1969.4
II. Executive Summary
DHS proposes to adjust the USCIS fee
schedule, which specifies the fee
amount charged for each immigration
and naturalization benefit request.5 DHS
last adjusted the fee schedule on
December 23, 2016, by a weighted
average increase of 21 percent. See 81
FR 73292 (Oct. 24, 2016) (final rule) (FY
2016/2017 fee rule).
USCIS is primarily funded by
immigration and naturalization benefit
request fees charged to applicants and
1 USCIS uses commercially available activitybased costing (ABC) software, SAP Business Objects
Profitability and Cost Management, to create
financial models as described in the supporting
documentation.
2 Benefit request means any application, petition,
motion, appeal, or other request relating to an
immigration or naturalization benefit, whether such
request is filed on a paper form or submitted in an
electronic format, provided such request is
submitted in a manner prescribed by DHS for such
purpose. See 8 CFR 1.2.
3 DHS uses the terms biometric fees, biometric
services fees, and biometric fee synonymously in
this rule to describe the cost and process for
capturing, storing, or using biometrics.
4 This proposed rule describes key inputs to the
ABC model (for example, budget, workload
forecasts, staffing, and completion rates), both here
and in the supporting documentation.
5 For the purposes of this rulemaking, DHS is
including all requests funded from the IEFA in the
term ‘‘benefit request’’ or ‘‘immigration benefit
request’’ although the form or request may not be
to request an immigration benefit. For example,
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) is
solely an exercise of prosecutorial discretion by
DHS. It is not an immigration benefit and would fit
under the definition of ‘‘benefit request’’ solely for
purpose of this rule. For historic receipts and
completion information, see USCIS immigration
and citizenship data available at https://
www.uscis.gov/tools/reports-studies/immigrationforms-data.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

62282

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

petitioners. Fees collected from
individuals and entities filing
immigration benefit requests are
deposited into the Immigration
Examinations Fee Account (IEFA).
These fee collections fund the cost of
fairly and efficiently adjudicating
immigration benefit requests, including
those provided without charge to
refugee, asylum, and certain other
applicants. The focus of this fee review
is the IEFA, which comprised
approximately 95 percent of USCIS’
total FY 2018 enacted spending
authority.
In accordance with the requirements
and principles of the Chief Financial
Officers Act of 1990 (CFO Act), 31
U.S.C. 901–03 and Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
Circular A–25, USCIS conducts biennial
reviews of the non-statutory fees
deposited into the IEFA. If necessary,
DHS proposes fee adjustments to ensure
full cost recovery. USCIS completed a
fee review for the FY 2019/2020
biennial period. The primary objective
of the fee review is to determine
whether current immigration and
naturalization benefit fees will generate
sufficient revenue to fund the
anticipated operating costs associated
with administering the nation’s legal
immigration system. The results
indicate that current fee levels are
insufficient to recover the full cost of
operations funded by the IEFA.
Therefore, DHS proposes to adjust
USCIS fees by a weighted average
increase of 21 percent.
In addition to the requirements of the
CFO Act, there are other important
reasons for conducting the FY 2019/
2020 fee review. The fee review:
• Allows for an assessment of USCIS
policy changes, staffing levels, costs,
revenue, etc. USCIS evaluates
operational requirements and makes
informed decisions concerning program
scaling, resource planning, and staffing
allocations; and
• Provides those served by USCIS
with an opportunity to assess the effect
of fee changes.
USCIS calculates its fees to recover
the full cost of operations funded by the
IEFA. These costs do not include
limited appropriations provided by
Congress. If USCIS continues to operate
at current fee levels, it would
experience an average annual shortfall
(the amount by which expenses exceed
revenue) of $1,262.3 million. This
projected shortfall poses a risk of
degrading USCIS operations funded by
the IEFA. As such, DHS proposes to
adjust USCIS fees by a 21 percent
weighted average increase to ensure full
cost recovery. The weighted average

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

increase is the percentage difference
between the current and proposed fees
by immigration benefit request.6 This
rule refers to weighted average instead
of straight average because the figure
represents a more accurate depiction of
the overall effect that the proposed fee
increase would have on total fee
revenue.
The proposed fees would ensure that
IEFA revenue covers USCIS’ costs
associated with adjudicating the
immigration benefit requests. The
proposed fee schedule accounts for
increased costs to adjudicate
immigration benefit requests, detect and
deter immigration fraud, and thoroughly
vet applicants, petitioners, and
beneficiaries. DHS also proposes to
change fee waiver and fee exemption
policies to limit some fee increases.
Additionally, DHS proposes to establish
multiple fees for different categories of
petitions for nonimmigrant workers in
response to DHS Office of Inspector
General (OIG) audit recommendations to
USCIS. DHS proposes a range of fees
that vary by the nonimmigrant
classification and to limit petitions for
nonimmigrant workers to 25 named
beneficiaries. DHS believes the
proposed fees more accurately reflect
the differing burdens of adjudication
and enable USCIS to adjudicate these
petitions more effectively.
In addition to fee changes, this
proposed rule would also make changes
in the forms and fee structures used by
USCIS. Some of these changes would
result in cost savings, and others would
result in costs or transfers. For the 10year implementation period of the
proposed rule, DHS estimates the total
cost of the rule to applicants/petitioners
is $4,730,732,250 undiscounted,
$4,035,410,566 discounted at 3-percent,
and $3,322,668,371 discounted at 7percent. DHS estimates the total cost
savings (benefits) to the applicants/
petitioners is $220,187,510
undiscounted, $187,824,412 discounted
at 3-percent, and $154,650,493
discounted at 7-percent. Much of this
6 USCIS uses weighted average instead of a
straight average because of the difference in volume
by immigration benefit type and the resulting effect
on fee revenue. The 21 percent weighted average
increase is a change in the average fee for a form
that currently requires a fee compared to the
average proposed fee per form. The sum of the
current fees multiplied by the projected FY 2019/
2020 fee-paying receipts for each immigration
benefit type, divided by the total fee-paying receipts
= $530. The sum of the proposed fees multiplied
by the projected FY 2019/2020 receipts for each
immigration benefit type, divided by the fee-paying
receipts = $640. There is a $110, or approximately
21 percent difference between the two averages.
These averages exclude fees that do not receive cost
reallocation, such as the separate biometric services
fee and the proposed Form I–821D fee.

PO 00000

Frm 00004

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

total is expected to be transfers between
applicants and the federal government
or between groups of applicants, rather
than new, real resource costs to the U.S.
economy.
A. Effective Date
The FY 2019/2020 fee review assumes
these changes may affect the second
year of the biennial period, as FY 2020
began on October 1, 2019.
III. Basis for the Fee Review
A. Legal Authority and Guidance
DHS issues this proposed rule
consistent with INA section 286(m), 8
U.S.C. 1356(m) (authorizing DHS to
charge fees for adjudication and
naturalization services at a level to
‘‘ensure recovery of the full costs of
providing all such services, including
the costs of similar services provided
without charge to asylum applicants or
other immigrants’’) 7 and the CFO Act,
31 U.S.C. 901–03 (requiring each
agency’s Chief Financial Officer (CFO)
to review, on a biennial basis, the fees
imposed by the agency for services it
provides, and to recommend changes to
the agency’s fees).
This proposed rule is also consistent
with non-statutory guidance on fees, the
budget process, and federal accounting
principles. See OMB Circular A–25,
available at https://
www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/
uploads/2017/11/Circular-025.pdf, 58
FR 38142 (July 15, 1993) (establishing
federal policy guidance regarding fees
assessed by federal agencies for
government services); Federal
Accounting Standards Advisory Board
Handbook, Version 17 (06/18),
Statement of Federal Financial
Accounting Standards 4: Managerial
Cost Accounting Standards and
Concepts, SFFAS 4, available at http://
files.fasab.gov/pdffiles/handbook_sffas_
4.pdf (generally describing cost
accounting concepts and standards, and
defining ‘‘full cost’’ to mean the sum of
direct and indirect costs that contribute
to the output, including the costs of
supporting services provided by other
segments and entities.); id. at 49–66
(identifying various classifications of
costs to be included and recommending
various methods of cost assignment); see
also OMB Circular A–11, Preparation,
Submission, and Execution of the
7 The longstanding interpretation of DHS is that
the ‘‘including’’ clause in section 286(m) does not
constrain DHS’s fee authority under the statute. The
‘‘including’’ clause offers only a non-exhaustive list
of some of the costs that DHS may consider part of
the full costs of providing adjudication and
naturalization services. See 8 U.S.C. 1356(m); 84 FR
23930, 23932 n.1 (May 23, 2019); 81 FR 26903,
26906 n.10 (May 4, 2016).

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Budget, section 20.7(d), (g) (June 29,
2018)), available at https://
www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/
uploads/2018/06/a11_2018.pdf
(providing guidance on the FY 2020
budget and instructions on budget
execution, offsetting collections, and
user fees). DHS uses OMB Circular A–
25 as general policy guidance for
determining user fees for immigration
benefit requests, with exceptions as
outlined in section III.B. of this
preamble. DHS also follows the annual
guidance in OMB Circular A–11 if it
requests appropriations to offset a
portion of IEFA costs.8
Finally, this rule accounts for, and is
consistent with, congressional
appropriations for specific USCIS
programs. FY 2018 appropriations for
USCIS provided funding for only the EVerify employment eligibility
verification program. Congress provided
E-Verify with $108.9 million for
operations and support and $22.7
million for procurement, construction,
and improvements. See Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018, Public Law
115–66, div. F, tit. IV (Mar. 21, 2018)
(DHS Appropriations Act 2018). The
total E-Verify appropriation was $131.5
million in FY 2018. FY 2019 E-Verify
appropriations are $109.7 million for
operations and support, plus $22.8
million for procurement, construction,
and improvements; the latter sum
remains available until the end of FY
2021. See Consolidated Appropriations
Act, 2019, Public Law 116–6, div. A, tit.
IV (Feb. 15, 2019). DHS provides this
information only for comparison to the
IEFA. E-Verify is not included in this
fee review budget because, generally,
appropriations, not fees, fund E-Verify.
In addition, Congress appropriated $10
million for the Citizenship and
Integration Grant Program. Id. Together,
the total FY 2019 appropriations for
USCIS are $142.5 million. For the last
several years, USCIS has had the
authority to spend no more than $10
million for citizenship grants. The
funding for the grant program came
from the IEFA fee revenue or a mix of
appropriations and fee revenue since
2013.9 While Congress appropriated
8 OMB Circulars A–25 and A–11 provide
nonbinding internal Executive Branch direction for
the development of fee schedules under the
Independent Offices Appropriations Act (IOAA)
and appropriations requests, respectively. See 5
CFR 1310.1. Although DHS is not required to
strictly adhere to these OMB circulars in setting
USCIS fees, DHS used the activity-based costing
(ABC) methodology supported in Circulars A–25
and A–11 to develop the proposed fee schedule.
9 USCIS received $2.5 million for the immigrant
integration grants program in FY 2013 (Pub. L. 113–
6) and FY 2014 (Pub. L. 113–76). USCIS did not
receive appropriations for the immigrant integration

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

funds for grants in FY 2019, it did not
reduce authorized IEFA spending to
offset the change. As such, the $10
million previously budgeted for
citizenship grants remains in the FY
2019/2020 IEFA fee review budget.
B. Full Cost Recovery
Consistent with these authorities and
sources, this proposed rule would
ensure that USCIS recovers its full
operating costs and maintains an
adequate level of service in two ways:
First, where possible, the proposed
rule would set fees at levels sufficient to
cover the full cost of the corresponding
services associated with fairly and
efficiently adjudicating immigration
benefit requests.10 DHS generally
follows OMB Circular A–25, which
‘‘establishes federal policy regarding
fees assessed for Government services
and for sale or use of Government goods
or resources.’’ OMB Circular A–25, User
Charges (Revised), para. 6, 58 FR 38142
(July 15, 1993). A primary objective of
OMB Circular A–25 is to ensure that
federal agencies recover the full cost of
providing specific services to users and
associated costs. See id., para. 5. Full
costs include, but are not limited to, an
appropriate share of:
• Direct and indirect personnel costs,
including salaries and fringe benefits,
such as medical insurance and
retirement;
• Physical overhead, consulting, and
other indirect costs, including material
and supply costs, utilities, insurance,
travel, and rents or imputed rents on
land, buildings, and equipment;
• Management and supervisory costs;
and
grants program in FY 2015, FY 2016, FY 2017, and
FY 2018.
10 Section 286(m) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1356(m),
provides broader fee-setting authority and is an
exception from the stricter costs-for-servicesrendered requirements of the Independent Offices
Appropriations Act, 1952, 31 U.S.C. 9701(c)
(IOAA). See Seafarers Int’l Union of N. Am. v. U.S.
Coast Guard, 81 F.3d 179 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (IOAA
provides that expenses incurred by agency to serve
some independent public interest cannot be
included in cost basis for a user fee, although
agency is not prohibited from charging applicant
full cost of services rendered to applicant, which
also results in some incidental public benefits).
Congress initially enacted immigration fee authority
under the IOAA. See Ayuda, Inc. v. Attorney
General, 848 F.2d 1297 (D.C. Cir. 1988). Congress
thereafter amended the relevant provision of law to
require deposit of the receipts into the separate
Immigration Examinations Fee Account of the
Treasury as offsetting receipts to fund operations,
and broadened the fee-setting authority.
Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the
Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations
Act, 1991, Public law 101–515, sec. 210(d), 104
Stat. 2101, 2111 (Nov. 5, 1990). Additional values
are considered in setting IEFA fees that would not
be considered in setting fees under the IOAA. See
72 FR at 29866–7.

PO 00000

Frm 00005

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62283

• Costs of enforcement, collection,
research, establishment of standards,
and regulation.
Id.
Secondly, this proposed rule would
set fees at a level sufficient to fund
overall requirements and general
operations related to USCIS IEFA
programs that are not associated with
specific statutory fees or funded by
annual appropriations, benefit requests
fees that are statutorily set at a level
below full cost, or benefit requests that
are fee exempt, in whole or in part. As
noted, Congress has provided that
USCIS may set fees for providing
adjudication and naturalization services
at a level that will ensure recovery of
the full costs of providing all such
services, including the costs of similar
services provided without charge to
asylum applicants or other immigrants.
See INA section 286(m), 8 U.S.C.
1356(m).11 DHS interprets this statutory
fee-setting authority, including the
authorization to collect ‘‘full costs’’ for
providing ‘‘adjudication and
naturalization services,’’ as granting
DHS broad discretion to include costs
other than OMB Circular A–25 generally
provides. See OMB Circular A–25, para.
6d1; INA section 286(m), 8 U.S.C.
1356(m). In short, DHS may charge fees
at a level that will ensure recovery of all
direct and indirect costs associated with
providing immigration adjudication and
naturalization services.12
Consistent with the historical
position, this proposed rule would set
fees at a level that ensures recovery of
the full operating costs of USCIS, the
entity within DHS that provides almost
all immigration adjudication and
naturalization services. See Homeland
Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107–
11 Congress has provided separate, but similar,
authority for establishing USCIS genealogy program
fees. See section 286(t) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1356(t).
The statute requires that genealogy program fees be
deposited into the Immigration Examinations Fee
Account and that the fees for such research and
information services may be set at a level that will
ensure the recovery of the full costs of providing
all such services. Id. The methodology for
calculating the genealogy program fees is discussed
in a separate section later in this preamble.
12 Congress has not defined either term with any
degree of specificity for purposes of subsections (m)
and (n). See, e.g., Barahona v. Napolitano, No. 10–
1574, 2011 WL 4840716, at **6–8 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 11,
2011) (‘‘While the term ‘full costs’ appears selfexplanatory, section 286(m) contains both silence
and ambiguity concerning the precise scope that
‘full costs’ entails in this context.’’); see also King
v. Burwell, 135 S. Ct. 2480, 2489 (2015)
(‘‘[O]ftentimes the ‘meaning—or ambiguity—of
certain words or phrases may only become evident
when placed in context.’ So when deciding whether
the language is plain, we must read the words ‘in
their context and with a view to their place in the
overall statutory scheme.’ ’’ (quoting FDA v. Brown
& Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529 U.S. 120, 132–33
(2000))).

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62284

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

296, sec. 451, 116 Stat. 2142 (Nov. 26,
2002) (6 U.S.C. 271). The statute
authorizes recovery of the full costs of
providing immigration adjudication and
naturalization services. Congress has
historically relied on this authority to
support the vast majority of USCIS
programs and operations conducted as
part of adjudication and naturalization
service delivery. This conclusion is
supported by Congress’ historical
appropriations to USCIS. The agency
receives only a small annual
appropriation. USCIS must use other
means to fund, as a matter of both
discretion and necessity, all other
operations.
Certain functions, including the
Systematic Alien Verification for
Entitlements (SAVE) program 13 and the
Office of Citizenship,14 which USCIS
has administered since DHS’s inception,
are integral parts of fulfilling USCIS’
statutory responsibility to provide
immigration adjudication and
naturalization services. They are not
associated with specific fees examined
during the biennial fee review, but may
be funded by the IEFA. Similarly, when
a filing fee for an immigration benefit
request such as Temporary Protected
Status (TPS) is capped by statute at $50
and does not cover the cost of
adjudicating these benefit requests, DHS
may recover the difference with fees
charged to other immigration benefit
requests. See INA section 244(c)(1)(B), 8
U.S.C. 1254a(c)(1)(B); 8 CFR
103.7(b)(1)(i)(NN); proposed 8 CFR
106.2(a)(37)(i). Finally, when DHS
exempts certain benefit requests from
filing or visa fees, such as, for example,
applications or petitions from victims
who assist law enforcement in the
investigation or prosecution of acts of
human trafficking (T nonimmigrant
status) or certain other crimes (U
nonimmigrant status), USCIS recovers
the cost of processing those fee-exempt
visas with fees charged to other
13 USCIS funds the SAVE program by user fees
and IEFA funds, as Congress has not provided any
direct appropriated funds for the program since FY
2007. SAVE provides an ‘‘immigration adjudication
. . . service’’ under INA sections 286(m) and (n) to
Federal, state and local agencies who require
immigration adjudication information in
administering their benefits.
14 The Homeland Security Act created the Office
of Citizenship at the same time as several other
mission essential USCIS offices, such as those for
legal, budget, and policy. Like those offices, the
Office of Citizenship has always been considered an
essential part of the ‘‘adjudication and
naturalization services’’ USCIS provides under
sections 286(m) and (n) of the INA. An integral part
of providing such services, as Congress recognized
in creating the Citizenship office in section 451(f)
of the Homeland Security Act (6 U.S.C. 271(f)),
includes providing information to potential
applicants for naturalization regarding the process
of naturalization and related activities.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

applicants and petitioners. See, e.g., 8
CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(UU)–(VV); proposed
8 CFR 106.2(a)(46)–(47).
In short, the full cost of USCIS
operations cannot be as directly
correlated or connected to a specific fee
as OMB Circular A–25 advises.
Nonetheless, DHS follows OMB Circular
A–25 to the extent appropriate,
including directing that fees should be
set to recover the costs of an agency’s
services in their entirety and that full
costs are determined based upon the
best available records of the agency. Id.
DHS applies the discretion provided in
INA section 286(m), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m),
to: (1) Use Activity-Based Costing (ABC)
to establish a model for assigning costs
to specific benefit requests in a manner
reasonably consistent with OMB
Circular A–25; (2) distribute costs that
are not attributed to, or driven by,
specific adjudication and naturalization
services; 15 and (3) make additional
adjustments to effectuate specific policy
objectives.16
By approving DHS’s annual
appropriations, which provide limited
appropriated funds to USCIS, Congress
has consistently recognized that the
‘‘full’’ costs of operating USCIS,
including SAVE and the Office of
Citizenship, less any appropriated
funding, is the appropriate cost basis for
establishing IEFA fees. Nevertheless, in
each biennial fee review, DHS adds
refinements to its determination of
immigration benefit fees, including the
level by which fees match directly
assignable, associated, and indirect
costs.
C. Immigration Examinations Fee
Account
USCIS manages three fee accounts:
• The IEFA (includes premium
processing revenues),17
• The Fraud Prevention and
Detection Account,18 and
15 The ABC model distributes indirect costs. Costs
that are not assigned to specific fee-paying
immigration benefit requests are reallocated to other
fee-paying immigration benefit requests outside the
model. For example, the model determines the
direct and indirect costs for refugee workload. The
costs associated with processing the refugee
workload are reallocated outside the model to feepaying immigration benefit requests.
16 DHS may reasonably adjust fees based on value
judgments and public policy reasons where a
rational basis for the methodology is propounded in
the rulemaking. See FCC v. Fox Television Stations,
Inc., 556 U.S. 502, 515 (2009); Motor Vehicle Mfrs.
Ass’n v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S.
29 (1983).
17 INA sec. 286(m), (n) & (u); 8 U.S.C. 1356(m),
(n) & (u).
18 INA secs. 214(c)(12)–(13), 286(v); 8 U.S.C.
1184(c)(12)–(13) 1356(v).

PO 00000

Frm 00006

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

• The H–1B Nonimmigrant Petitioner
Account.19
In 1988, Congress established the
IEFA in the Treasury of the United
States. See Public Law 100–459, sec.
209, 102 Stat. 2186 (Oct. 1, 1988)
(codified as amended at INA sections
286(m) and (n), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m) and
(n)). Fees deposited into the IEFA fund
the provision of immigration
adjudication and naturalization
services. In subsequent legislation,
Congress directed that the IEFA also
fund the full costs of providing all such
services, including services provided to
immigrants at no charge. See Public Law
101–515, sec. 210(d)(1) and (2), 104 Stat.
2101, 2121 (Nov. 5, 1990).
Consequently, the immigration benefit
fees were increased to recover these
additional costs. See 59 FR 30520 (June
14, 1994). The IEFA comprised
approximately 95 percent of total
funding for USCIS in FY 2018 and is the
focus of this proposed rule.
The Fraud Prevention and Detection
Account and H–1B Nonimmigrant
Petitioner Account are both funded by
statutorily set fees. DHS has no
authority to adjust fees for these
accounts.
D. Fee Review History
Most recently, DHS published a
revised USCIS fee schedule in its FY
2016/2017 fee rule. See 81 FR 73292
(Oct. 24, 2016).20 The rule and
associated fees became effective on
December 23, 2016. DHS adjusted the
USCIS immigration benefits fee
schedule for the first time in more than
6 years, increasing fees by a weighted
average of 21 percent. The fee schedule
adjustment recovered all projected costs
for FY 2016–2017, including the
Refugee, Asylum, and International
Operations Directorate (RAIO), SAVE,
and the Office of Citizenship. See 81 FR
26911 and 73293.
The fee schedule had been adjusted
previously as well. Before the creation
of DHS, the Department of Justice (DOJ)
Immigration and Naturalization Service
(INS) 21 adjusted fees incrementally in
1994. See 59 FR 30520 (June 14, 1994).
19 INA secs. 214(c)(9), (11), 286(s); 8 U.S.C.
1184(c)(9), (11), 1356(s).
20 The phrase ‘‘FY 2016/2017 fee rule,’’ as used
in this proposed rule, encompasses the proposed
rule, final rule, fee review, and all supporting
documentation associated with the regulations
effective as of December 23, 2016.
21 The Homeland Security Act of 2002 abolished
the INS and transferred the INS’s immigration
administration and enforcement responsibilities
from DOJ to DHS. The INS’s immigration and
citizenship services functions were specifically
transferred to the Bureau of Citizenship and
Immigration Services, later renamed U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services. See Public
Law 107–296, 451 (6 U.S.C. 271).

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
DOJ conducted a comprehensive fee
review using activity-based costing
(ABC) and adjusted most IEFA fees in
1998. See 63 FR 1775 (Jan. 12, 1998)
(proposed rule); 63 FR 43604 (Aug. 14,
1998) (final rule). DOJ adjusted fees for
small volume workloads in 2000. See 64
FR 26698 (May 17, 1999) (proposed
rule); 64 FR 69883 (Dec. 15, 1999) (final
rule). DOJ adjusted fees by inflation in
2002. See 66 FR 65811 (Dec. 21, 2001).
Following the creation of DHS, it
adjusted fees in 2004 and 2005. See 69
FR 20528 (Apr. 15, 2004); 70 FR 56182
(Sept. 26, 2005). After those incremental
changes, DHS published a

comprehensive FY 2007 fee rule. See 72
FR 29851 (May 30, 2007). DHS further
amended USCIS fees in the FY 2010/
2011 fee rule. See 75 CFR 58962 (Sept.
24, 2010). This rule removed the costs
of the RAIO Directorate, SAVE, and the
Office of Citizenship from the fee
schedule, in anticipation of
appropriations from Congress that DHS
requested. See 75 FR 58961, 58966.
These resources did not fully
materialize, requiring USCIS to use
other fee revenue to support the
programs in the FY 2016/2017 fee rule.
See 81 FR 26910–12.

62285

The supporting documentation
accompanying this proposed rule in the
rulemaking docket at
www.regulations.gov contains a
historical fee schedule that shows the
immigration benefit fee history since
October 2005.
Table 1 summarizes the IEFA and
biometric services fee schedule that took
effect on December 23, 2016. DHS is
proposing to change the current fee
schedule as a result of the FY 2019/2020
fee review. The table excludes statutory
fees that DHS cannot adjust or can only
adjust by inflation.

TABLE 1—NON-STATUTORY IEFA IMMIGRATION BENEFIT REQUEST FEES
Form No.22

Title

G–1041 .............
G–1041A ..........
I–90 ...................
I–102 .................
I–129/129CW ....
I–129F ..............
I–130 .................
I–131 23 .............
I–131A ..............
I–140 .................
I–191 .................
I–192 .................
I–193 .................
I–212 .................
I–290B ..............
I–360 .................
I–485 .................
I–485 .................

Genealogy Index Search Request .......................................................................................................................
Genealogy Records Request ...............................................................................................................................
Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card ...............................................................................................
Application for Replacement/Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival-Departure Document .................................................
Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker .....................................................................................................................
Petition for Alien Fiance´(e) ...................................................................................................................................
Petition for Alien Relative .....................................................................................................................................
Application for Travel Document ..........................................................................................................................
Application for Carrier Documentation .................................................................................................................
Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker .....................................................................................................................
Application for Relief Under Former Section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) 24 .................
Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant ..........................................................................
Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa ...................................................................................................
Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission into the U.S. After Deportation or Removal ....................
Notice of Appeal or Motion ...................................................................................................................................
Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant ....................................................................................
Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status ..........................................................................
Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (certain applicants under the age of 14
years) 26.
Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur ............................................................................................................
Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status ...........................................................................................
Petition to Classify Orphan as an Immediate Relative ........................................................................................
Application for Advance Processing of an Orphan Petition .................................................................................
Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility ............................................................................................
Application for Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver ........................................................................................
Application for Waiver of the Foreign Residence Requirement (Under Section 212(e) of the INA, as Amended).
Application for Status as a Temporary Resident under Section 245A of the Immigration and Nationality Act ..
Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility ............................................................................................
Notice of Appeal of Decision under Section 210 or 245A ...................................................................................
Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A of the INA) 27 .......
Petition to Remove the Conditions of Residence ................................................................................................
Application for Employment Authorization ............................................................................................................
Petition to Classify Convention Adoptee as an Immediate Relative ....................................................................
Application for Determination of Suitability to Adopt a Child from a Convention Country ..................................
Request for Action on Approved Form I–800A ....................................................................................................
Application for Family Unity Benefits ....................................................................................................................
Application for Action on an Approved Application or Petition ............................................................................
Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions on Permanent Resident Status ...............................................
Application for Suspension of Deportation or Special Rule Cancellation of Removal 28 .....................................
Application for Civil Surgeon Designation ............................................................................................................
Application for Regional Center Designation Under the Immigrant Investor Program ........................................
Annual Certification of Regional Center ...............................................................................................................
Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U–1 Nonimmigrant ..........................................................................
Application for Entrepreneur Parole 29 .................................................................................................................
Application to File Declaration of Intention ...........................................................................................................
Request for a Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings ..................................................................
Application for Naturalization ................................................................................................................................
Application for Naturalization (Reduced Fee) ......................................................................................................
Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization Purposes .........................................................................
Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document .....................................................................
Application for Certification of Citizenship ............................................................................................................
Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate Under Section 322 ........................................................
USCIS Immigrant Fee ..........................................................................................................................................

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

I–526 .................
I–539 .................
I–600 .................
I–600A ..............
I–601 .................
I–601A ..............
I–612 .................
I–687 .................
I–690 .................
I–694 .................
I–698 .................
I–751 .................
I–765 .................
I–800 .................
I–800A ..............
I–800A Supp. 3
I–817 .................
I–824 .................
I–829 .................
I–881 .................
I–910 .................
I–924 .................
I–924A ..............
I–929 .................
I–941 .................
N–300 ...............
N–336 ...............
N–400 ...............
N–400 ...............
N–470 ...............
N–565 ...............
N–600 ...............
N–600K .............

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

PO 00000

Frm 00007

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Fee

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

$65
65
455
445
460
535
535
575
575
700
930
25 930/585
585
930
675
435
1,140
750
3,675
370
775
775
930
630
930
1,130
715
890
1,670
595
410
775
775
385
600
465
3,750
285/570
785
17,795
3,035
230
1,200
270
700
640
320
355
555
1,170
1,170
220

62286

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—NON-STATUTORY IEFA IMMIGRATION BENEFIT REQUEST FEES—Continued

Form No.22

Title

Fee

Biometric Services Fee ........................................................................................................................................

IV. FY 2019/2020 Immigration
Examinations Fee Account Fee Review

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

A. USCIS Projected Costs and Revenue
The primary objective of the fee
review is to determine whether current
immigration and naturalization benefit
fees will generate sufficient revenue to
fund anticipated operating costs
associated with administering USCIS’
role in the nation’s legal immigration
system. USCIS examines its recent
budget history, service levels, and
immigration trends to forecast costs,
22 Form, when used in connection with a benefit
or other request to be filed with DHS to request an
immigration benefit, means a device for the
collection of information in a standard format that
may be submitted in a paper format or an electronic
format as prescribed by USCIS on its official
internet website. The term ‘‘Form’’ followed by an
immigration form number includes an approved
electronic equivalent of such form as made
available by USCIS on its official internet website.
See 8 CFR 1.2 and 299.1. The word ‘‘form’’ is used
in this final rule in both the specific and general
sense.
23 As described in the NPRM, the United States’
obligations under the 1967 Protocol relating to the
Status of Refugees (incorporating by reference
Article 28 of the 1951 Convention relating to the
Status of Refugees) guide the Application for Travel
Document fees for a Refugee Travel Document. The
USCIS ABC model does not set these fees. See 8
CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(M)(2) and (3).
24 Form I–191 was previously titled Application
for Advance Permission to Return to
Unrelinquished Domicile. See 8 CFR
103.7(b)(1)(i)(O).
25 The Form I–192 fee remained $585 when filed
with and processed by CBP. See 8 CFR
103.7(b)(1)(i)(P).
26 This reduced fee is applied to ‘‘an applicant
under the age of 14 years when [the application] is
(i) submitted concurrently with the Form I–485 of
a parent, (ii) the applicant is seeking to adjust status
as a derivative of his or her parent, and (iii) the
child’s application is based on a relationship to the
same individual who is the basis for the child’s
parent’s adjustment of status, or under the same
legal authority as the parent.’’ 8 CFR
103.7(b)(1)(i)(U)(2).
27 The form’s name in the current fee provision
at 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(GG) is ‘‘Application to
Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent
Resident (Under section 245A of Public Law 99–
603).’’
28 Currently there are two USCIS fees for Form I–
881: $285 for individuals and $570 for families. See
8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(QQ)(1). DOJ’s Executive Office
for Immigration Review (EOIR) has a separate $165
fee.
29 USCIS excluded Form I–941, Application for
Entrepreneur Parole, from the FY 2019/2020 fee
review. As such, it will not appear in tables for
workload, fee-paying volume, or elsewhere in this
NPRM. DHS published a separate NPRM that
proposed to terminate the program. See 83 FR
24415 (June 28, 2018). DHS does not propose any
changes to this fee.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

revenue, and operational metrics. This
data helps USCIS identify the difference
between anticipated costs and revenue
as well as calculate proposed fees. The
FY 2019/2020 fee review encompasses
three core elements:
• Cost projections;
• Revenue projections; and
• Cost and revenue differential (the
difference between cost and revenue
projections).
1. Cost Projections
USCIS’ FY 2018 annual operating
plan (AOP) is the basis for the FY 2019/
2020 cost projections. These estimates
reflect the funding necessary to
maintain an adequate level of operations
and do not include program increases
for new development, modernization, or
acquisition. Cost projections also
include funding for enhancements that
facilitate the processing of additional
workload. Examples of items in the cost
projections include:
• Transfer of funding to U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement
($207.6 million in FY 2019 and FY
2020). This item is explained in section
IV.A.1.a., Use IEFA Fee Collections to
Fund Immigration Adjudication
Services Performed by ICE.
• Pay and benefits adjustments for
on-board staff ($280.2 million in FY
2019 and $89.8 million in FY 2020). Pay
adjustments account for cost of living
adjustments, within-grade pay
increases, and the annualization of
prior-year vacancies. The governmentwide cost of living adjustment rate
assumption is 2.0 percent for both FY
2019 and FY 2020. Within-grade pay
increases are routine raises awarded to
general schedule employees, based on
length of service and performance at an
acceptable level of competence.
Annualization of prior-year vacancies
account for a full-year cost of salaries
and benefits for positions that were onboard for only a portion of FY 2018.
• Pay and benefits for new staff
($116.7 million in FY 2019 and $128.8
million in FY 2020). Projected FY 2019
and FY 2020 workloads exceed current
workload capacity, thereby requiring
additional staff. The FY 2018 Staffing
Allocation Model 30 and new staff
30 The Staffing Allocation Model is a Microsoft
Excel-based workforce planning tool that estimates
the staffing requirements necessary to adjudicate
workload receipt (for example, applications and
petitions) forecasts at target processing times.

PO 00000

Frm 00008

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

85

enhancement requests yield an
additional 2,098 positions necessary to
meet adjudicative processing goals and
other USCIS mission objectives,
including administrative functions. In
total, the FY 2016/2017 fee rule
assumed a total authorized staffing level
of 14,543, whereas estimates used for
this proposed rule reflect 20,958. This
represents an increase of 6,415 or 44
percent. This additional staffing
requirement reflects the facts that it
takes USCIS longer to adjudicate many
workloads than was planned for in the
FY 2016/2017 fee rule and that
workload volumes, particularly for work
types that do not currently generate fee
revenue, have grown.
• Net additional costs ($150.8 million
in FY 2019 and $6.2 million in FY
2020). In addition to non-pay general
expenses associated with on-boarding
the new staff described above, these
costs include other enhancement
requests such as secure mail shipping
for permanent resident cards, increased
background investigations, headquarters
consolidation, etc. The additional
resources are to sustain current
operations necessary for achieving
USCIS’ strategic goals. USCIS
considered all cost data that was
available at the time it conducted this
fee review, including data on costsaving measures. It does not account for
recent cost-savings initiatives for which
data were not yet available at the time
of this fee review. However, USCIS
intends to fully evaluate and capture
any relevant cost-savings data during its
next biennial fee review.
Table 2 is a crosswalk summary of the
FY 2018 AOP to the FY 2019/2020 cost
projections. It accounts for pay and nonpay general expenses for on-board and
new staff, other resource requirements
or adjustments, and the removal of costs
associated with temporary programs
such as TPS. FY 2019 cost projections
are 20 percent higher than FY 2018
costs. FY 2020 cost projections are 5
percent higher than FY 2019 cost
projections. The FY 2019/2020 average
annual budget is $4,670.5 million. This
represents a $1,632.5 million, or 54
percent, increase over the FY 2016/2017
fee rule average annual budget of
$3,038.0 million. The primary cost
driver is payroll, which accounts for
30.9 percent of the increase from the
prior fee rule average annual budget.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
The funding transfer to ICE accounts for
about 6 percentage points (i.e., 28.5

62287

percent) of the 21 percent total weighted
average fee increase.

TABLE 2—COST PROJECTIONS
[FY 2019/2020 fee review IEFA non-premium budget (in millions)]
Total Base FY 2018 IEFA Non-Premium Budget ...............................................................................................................................
Plus: Spending Adjustments ................................................................................................................................................................

$3,585.6
217.2

Total Adjusted FY 2018 IEFA Non-Premium Budget ..................................................................................................................
Plus: Transfer to ICE ...........................................................................................................................................................................
Plus: Pay Inflation and Promotions/Within Grade Increases ..............................................................................................................
Plus: Net Additional Costs ...................................................................................................................................................................

3,802.8
207.6
280.2
267.5

Total Adjusted FY 2019 IEFA Non-Premium Budget ..................................................................................................................
Plus: Pay Inflation and Promotions/Within Grade Increases ..............................................................................................................
Plus: Net Additional Costs ...................................................................................................................................................................

4,558.1
218.6
6.2

Total Adjusted FY 2020 IEFA Non-Premium Budget ..................................................................................................................

4,782.9

FY 2019/2020 Average Non-Premium Budget .....................................................................................................................

4,670.5

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

a. Use IEFA Fee Collections To Fund
Immigration Adjudication Services
Performed by ICE
The President’s FY 2019 and FY 2020
budget requests include a $207.6
million transfer of IEFA funds to ICE.
DHS proposes to use USCIS fees to
recover the full amount of this proposed
transfer.31
DHS may use fees deposited into the
IEFA to fund the expenses of providing
immigration adjudication and
naturalization services and the cost of
collection, safeguarding, and accounting
for the IEFA funds. See INA section
286(m), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m). Funds
deposited into the IEFA are primarily
used by USCIS, but they may also be
used to reimburse other DHS
components, including ICE, for
qualifying costs. DHS proposes to
recover, via USCIS’ fee schedule, the
full amount of the proposed transfer
from past budget requests. See INA
section 286(n); 8 U.S.C. 1356(n). DHS
will transfer funds annually from the
IEFA to ICE’s appropriations so as to
reimburse those appropriations for the
cost of providing qualifying services,
which will increase the level of service
provided beyond current levels.
DHS ‘‘immigration adjudication and
naturalization services’’ do not end with
a decision to approve or deny a request.
31 For additional information on ICE’s FY 2019
costs, see pages 46 and 254–263 (called ICE—O&S–
20 and ICE—IEFA–1–10, respectively, in the
presentation) of the DHS ICE FY 2019
Congressional Justification located at https://
www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/
U.S.%20Immigration%
20and%20Customs%20Enforcement.pdf. For
information of ICE’s FY 2020 costs, see pages 261–
270 (called ICE—IEFA–3) of the DHS ICE FY 2020
Congressional Justification located at https://
www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/19_
0318_MGMT_CBJ-Immigration-CustomsEnforcement_0.pdf.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

USCIS and ICE, as components of DHS,
share a responsibility to ensure the
integrity of the U.S. immigration system
beyond the moment of adjudication.
DHS believes that ICE investigations of
potential immigration fraud perpetrated
by individuals and entities who have
sought immigration benefits before
USCIS and efforts to enforce applicable
immigration law and regulations with
regard to such individuals and entities
constitute direct support of immigration
adjudication and naturalization
services. Thus, the IEFA may fund ICE
enforcement and support positions, as
well as ancillary costs, to the extent that
such positions and costs support
immigration adjudication and
naturalization services. ICE HSI could
use funds transferred from the IEFA to
support investigations of immigration
benefit fraud via Document and Benefit
Fraud Task Forces (DBFTFs), Operation
Janus, and the HSI National Lead
Development Center. DBFTFs facilitate
information sharing and coordination
among ICE, USCIS, other federal
entities, as well as state and local law
enforcement for the purpose of
investigating document and benefit
fraud in support of immigration and
naturalization services. Operation Janus
is a joint initiative including USCIS and
ICE to ensure that individuals who have
a previous order of removal have not
and will not be able to fraudulently
obtain immigration benefits under an
alternate identity, thus ensuring the
integrity of the immigration
adjudication and naturalization services
provided by USCIS. The HSI National
Lead Development Center will receive
referrals and review investigative leads
as part of investigations into
immigration fraud. Considering what
constitutes immigration adjudication
and naturalization services and

PO 00000

Frm 00009

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

collection, safeguarding, and accounting
expenses under INA sections 286(m),
(n), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m), (n), adjudication
and naturalization services includes all
costs for work related to determining or
adjudicating whether applicants may
receive such services. The cost of the
services provided includes the cost of
any investigatory work necessary to
adjudicate applications or provide
services, including investigations of
fraud. Therefore, these activities
constitute support of immigration
adjudication and naturalization
services.
Moreover, while transfers between
appropriations are generally prohibited
absent statutory authority, INA section
286(n), 8 U.S.C. 1356(n), expressly
authorizes the use of the fees deposited
in the IEFA to reimburse any
appropriation for expenses in providing
immigration adjudication and
naturalization services. DHS has
determined that the IEFA may be used
to reimburse appropriations that fund
enforcement and support positions to
the extent that such positions support
adjudication and naturalization
services. Therefore, DHS proposes to
recover the costs through the USCIS fee
schedule. To see how the ICE transfer
affects proposed fees, see section VII.
Other Possible Fee Scenarios in this
preamble.32
The aforementioned cost projections
serve as the basis for the additional ICE
revenue of $207.6 million covered by
this rule. DHS recognizes that the
32 The Administration has notified Congress of its
intention to shift the cost of these ICE activities
from annual appropriations to IEFA. See previous
footnotes. If Congress rejects the Administration’s
proposal, or if DHS does not ultimately shift these
costs from annual appropriations to IEFA, USCIS
will not include this use of these funds in its fee
model for the final rule.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62288

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

$207.6 million previously identified in
budget requests may propose to transfer
more funding to ICE than is needed to
fund activities that are reimbursable
through the IEFA. DHS continues to
study which ICE costs would be
reimbursable through the IEFA, and
may announce more precise cost
estimates prior to publication of a final
rule. To the extent that such cost
estimates are lower than the $207.6
million figure currently accounted for in
the rule, fee levels would be revised
downward.33
DHS proposes to establish all USCIS
fees at a level necessary to recover the
full amount of this proposed transfer.
However, in the final rule, DHS may
establish a separate surcharge for the
amount necessary to recover the
estimated funds to be transferred to ICE.
The surcharge would be separately
codified, but collected along with the
fee for each benefit request for which a
fee is established in the final rule. DHS
encourages comments on the method

used to recover the ICE adjudication and
naturalization service costs.
2. Revenue Projections
USCIS’ revenue projections are
informed by internal immigration
benefit request receipt forecasts and 12
months of historical actual fee-paying
receipts to account for fee-waiver/feeexemption trends. USCIS uses actual
revenue collections from June 2016 to
May 2017 as a basis for the fee-paying
assumptions in the FY 2019/2020
revenue projections.
USCIS’ current fee schedule is
expected to yield $3.41 billion of
average annual revenue during the FY
2019/2020 biennial period. This
represents a $0.93 billion, or 38 percent,
increase from the FY 2016/2017 fee rule
projection of $2.48 billion. See 81 FR
26911. The projected revenue increase
is due to higher fees as a result of the
FY 2016/2017 fee rule and more
anticipated fee-paying receipts. The FY
2016/2017 fee rule forecasted 5,870,989

total workload receipts and 5,140,415
fee-paying receipts. See 81 FR 26923–4.
However, the FY 2019/2020 fee review
forecasts 9,336,015 total workload
receipts and 7,789,861 fee-paying
receipts. This represents a 59 percent
increase to workload and 52 percent
increase to fee-paying receipt volume
assumptions. Despite the increase in
projected revenue above the FY 2016/
2017 fee rule projection, this additional
revenue is insufficient to recover USCIS’
increased costs, as discussed in the next
section.
3. Cost and Revenue Differential
USCIS identifies the difference
between anticipated costs and revenue,
assuming no changes in fees, to
determine whether the existing fee
schedule is sufficient to recover full
costs or whether a fee adjustment is
necessary. Table 3 summarizes the
projected cost and revenue differential.
Summary values may vary due to
rounding.

TABLE 3—IEFA NON-PREMIUM COST AND REVENUE COMPARISON
[Dollars in millions]

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Fiscal year

FY 2019

FY 2020

FY 2019/2020
average

Non-Premium Revenue ...............................................................................................................
Non-Premium Budget ..................................................................................................................

$3,408.2
4,558.1

$3,408.2
4,782.9

$3,408.2
4,670.5

Difference .............................................................................................................................

¥1,149.9

¥1,374.7

¥1,262.3

Historically, and for the purpose of
the fee review, USCIS reports costs and
revenue as an average over the 2-year
period. In Table 3, FY 2019 and 2020
costs and revenue are averaged to
determine the projected amounts to be
recovered through this rule. Based on
current immigration benefit and
biometric services fees and projected
volumes, USCIS expects fees to generate
$3.41 billion in average annual revenue
in FY 2019 and FY 2020. For the same
period, the average annual cost of
processing those immigration benefit
requests and providing biometric
services is $4.67 billion. This yields an
average annual deficit of $1.26 billion.
In other words, USCIS expects projected
FY 2019/2020 total operating costs to
exceed projected total revenue.
Because projected costs are higher
than projected revenue, USCIS has
several options to address the shortfall:
1. Reduce projected costs;

2. Use carryover funds or revenue
from the recovery of prior year
obligations; or
3. Adjust fees with notice and
comment rulemaking.
DHS believes that reducing the
projected costs to equal the projected
revenue would risk degrading USCIS
operations funded by the IEFA.
However, DHS did assess several
possible fee review budgets. For
example, the effect of the $207.6 million
transfer from USCIS to ICE is shown
below in section VII. Other Possible Fee
Scenarios. Projected carryover is
negative in both FY 2019 and FY 2020
and thus eliminating this transfer is
insufficient to bridge the gap between
projected costs and revenue.34 Likewise,
USCIS estimates that recovered revenue
from prior year obligations will be
insufficient. USCIS estimates that it may
recover $91.9 million in FY 2019 and
$94.2 million in FY 2020 for the nonpremium IEFA. Therefore, DHS
proposes to increase revenue through

the fee adjustments described in detail
throughout this rule.

33 The possible effects of a different level of ICE
costs to be funded by USCIS benefit request fees is
discussed further in VII. Other Possible Fee
Scenarios.

34 In the docket for this proposed rule, the FY
2019/2020 Immigration Examinations Fee Account
Fee Review Supporting Documentation has more

information. See the section titled IEFA NonPremium Carryover Projections & Targets.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

PO 00000

Frm 00010

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

B. Methodology
When conducting a fee review, USCIS
reviews its recent operating
environment to determine the
appropriate method to assign costs to
immigration benefit requests, including
biometric services. USCIS uses activitybased costing (ABC), a business
management tool that assigns resource
costs to operational activities and then
to products and/or services. USCIS uses
commercially available ABC software to
create financial models. These models
determine the cost of each major step
towards processing immigration benefit
requests and providing biometric
services. This is the same methodology
that USCIS used in the last five fee
reviews, and it is the basis for the
current fee structure. Following the FY
2016/2017 fee rule, USCIS identified
several key methodology changes to
improve the accuracy of its ABC model.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Please refer to the Methodology Changes
Implemented in the FY 2019/2020 Fee
Review section of the Supporting
Documentation located in the docket of
this rule.

Applicants, petitioners, and requestors
who pay a fee fund the cost of
processing requests for fee-waived or
fee-exempt immigration benefit
requests.

1. Volume
USCIS uses two types of volume data
in the fee review: Workload and feepaying volume. Workload volume is a
projection of the total number of
immigration benefit requests that USCIS
will receive in a fiscal year. Fee-paying
volume is a projection of the number of
applicants, petitioners, and requestors
that will pay a fee when filing requests
for immigration benefits. Not all
applicants, petitioners, or requestors
pay a fee. Those applicants, petitioners,
and requestors for whom USCIS grants
a fee waiver or to whom an exemption
applies are represented in the workload
volume, but not the fee-paying volume.

a. Workload Volume and Volume
Projection Committee
USCIS uses statistical modeling,
immigration receipt data from the last
15 years, and internal assessments of
future developments (such as
annualized data prepared by the USCIS
Office of Performance and Quality) to
develop workload volume projections.
All relevant USCIS directorates and
program offices are represented on the
USCIS Volume Projection Committee
(VPC). The VPC forecasts USCIS
workload volume using subject matter
expertise from various directorates and
program offices, including the Service
Centers, National Benefits Center, RAIO,

62289

and regional, district, and field offices.
Input from these offices helps refine the
volume projections. The VPC reviews
short- and long-term volume trends. In
most cases, time series models provide
volume projections by form type. Time
series models use historical receipts
data to determine patterns (such as
level, trend, and seasonality) or
correlations with historical events to
forecast receipts. When possible, models
are also used to determine relationships
between different benefit request types.
Workload volume is a key element used
to determine the USCIS resources
needed to process benefit requests
within established adjudicative
processing goals. It is also the primary
cost driver for assigning activity costs to
immigration benefits and biometric
services 35 in the USCIS ABC model.

TABLE 4—WORKLOAD VOLUME COMPARISON

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Immigration benefit request

Average annual
FY 2016/2017 projected
workload receipts

Average annual
FY 2019/2020 projected
workload receipts

810,707
10,143
432,156
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
45,351
911,349
256,622
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
88,602
24,706
26,428
593,717
14,673
172,001
N/A
15,781
N/A
42,724
18
21
39

767,020
7,700
553,266
423,304
3,962
2,256
41,502
25,456
43,491
8,981
4,315
52,000
984,107
480,834
449,073
20,714
1,248
9,799
161,000
24,050
42,873
632,500
14,000
231,000
163,000
11,776
1,500
67,000
0
30
10

¥43,687
¥2,443
121,110
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
6,649
72,758
224,212
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
72,398
¥656
16,445
38,783
¥673
58,999
N/A
¥4,005
N/A
24,276
¥18
9
¥29

91
173,000
747,825
1,585
2,069
N/A
10,921

100
156,000
2,851,000
1,500
1,400
396,000
11,303

9
¥17,000
2,103,175
¥85
¥669
N/A
382

3,562

3,500

¥62

N/A
609

340
530

N/A
¥79

I–90 Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card ...............................................
I–102 Application for Replacement/Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival-Departure Document
I–129 Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Subtotal .....................................................
I–129H1 ..................................................................................................................
I–129H2A—Named Beneficiaries ..........................................................................
I–129H2B—Named Beneficiaries ..........................................................................
I–129L ....................................................................................................................
I–129O ...................................................................................................................
I–129CW, I–129E&TN, and I–129MISC ................................................................
I–129H2A—Unnamed Beneficiaries ......................................................................
I–129H2B—Unnamed Beneficiaries ......................................................................
I–129F Petition for Alien Fiance´(e) ...............................................................................
I–130 Petition for Alien Relative ...................................................................................
I–131/I–131A Application for Travel Document Subtotal ..............................................
I–131 Application for Travel Document .................................................................
I–131 Refugee Travel Document for an individual age 16 or older ......................
I–131 Refugee Travel Document for a child under the age of 16 ........................
I–131A Application for Carrier Documentation ......................................................
I–140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker ....................................................................
I–290B Notice of Appeal or Motion ...............................................................................
I–360 Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er) or Special Immigrant ...................................
I–485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status ........................
I–526 Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur ...........................................................
I–539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status .........................................
I–589 Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal ....................................
I–600/600A; I–800/800A Intercountry Adoption-Related Petitions and Applications ...
I–600A/I–600 Supplement 3 Request for Action on Approved Form I–600A/I–600 ....
I–601A Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver ............................................................
I–687 Application for Status as a Temporary Resident ................................................
I–690 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility ..........................................
I–694 Notice of Appeal of Decision ..............................................................................
I–698 Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under
Section 245A of the INA) ..........................................................................................
I–751 Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence on Permanent Resident Status
I–765 Application for Employment Authorization ..........................................................
I–800A Supplement 3 Request for Action on Approved Form I–800A ........................
I–817 Application for Family Unity Benefits ..................................................................
I–821D Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Renewal) ...............
I–824 Application for Action on an Approved Application or Petition ...........................
I–829 Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions on Permanent Resident Status ..............................................................................................................................
I–881 Application for Suspension of Deportation or Special Rule Cancellation of Removal .........................................................................................................................
I–910 Application for Civil Surgeon Designation ..........................................................
35 As fully explained later in this preamble, DHS
is removing biometric services as a separate fee in
this rule, except as associated with an Application
for Temporary Protected Status and certain other

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

programs. Accordingly, N/A is included in the
average annual FY 2019/2020 projected workload
receipts and difference columns for biometrics in
Table 4.

PO 00000

Frm 00011

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Difference

62290

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 4—WORKLOAD VOLUME COMPARISON—Continued
Average annual
FY 2016/2017 projected
workload receipts

Average annual
FY 2019/2020 projected
workload receipts

400
882
575
41
4,666
830,673
362
28,914
69,723
N/A

520
950
2,200
4
4,700
913,500
110
28,000
64,000
61,000

120
68
1,625
¥37
34
82,827
¥252
¥914
¥5,723
N/A

N/A
71,527

3,000
105,492

N/A
33,965

N/A
N/A
N/A

260
69,557
7,763

N/A
N/A
N/A

N/A
N/A

6,132
21,000

N/A
N/A

N/A
472,511
3,605
2,410

780
594,000
4,650
2,550

N/A
121,489
1,045
140

Subtotal ..................................................................................................................
Biometric Services ........................................................................................................

5,870,989
3,028,254

9,336,015
N/A

3,508,026
N/A

Total .......................................................................................................................

8,899,243

9,336,015

479,772

Immigration benefit request
I–924 Application For Regional Center Designation Under the Immigrant Investor
Program .....................................................................................................................
I–924A Annual Certification of Regional Center ...........................................................
I–929 Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U–1 Nonimmigrant .........................
N–300 Application to File Declaration of Intention .......................................................
N–336 Request for a Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings ...............
N–400 Application for Naturalization ............................................................................
N–470 Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization Purposes ......................
N–565 Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document ..................
N–600/600K Application for Certificate of Citizenship Subtotal ...................................
N–600 Application for Certificate of Citizenship ....................................................
N–600K Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate Under Section
322 ......................................................................................................................
Inadmissibility Waiver Subtotal .....................................................................................
I–191 Application for Relief Under Former Section 212(c) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act (INA) ....................................................................................
I–192 Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant .................
I–193 Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa ..........................................
I–212 Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission into the U.S. After
Deportation or Removal .....................................................................................
I–601 Application for Waiver of Ground of Excludability .......................................
I–612 Application for Waiver of the Foreign Residence Requirement (Under
Section 212(e) of the INA, as Amended) ...........................................................
USCIS Immigrant Fee ...................................................................................................
G–1041 Genealogy Index Search Request ..................................................................
G–1041A Genealogy Records Request .......................................................................

b. Fee-Paying Volume
USCIS uses historical revenue and
receipt data to determine the number of
individuals who paid a fee for each
immigration benefit request. Total
revenue for an immigration benefit
request is divided by its fee to
determine the number of fee-paying
immigration benefit requests. Feepaying receipts are compared to the

total number of receipts (workload
volume) to determine a fee-paying
percentage for each immigration benefit
request. When appropriate, projected
fee-paying volume is adjusted to reflect
filing trends and anticipated policy
changes. These projections include the
effects of changes that DHS is proposing
in this rule to fee waiver policies, the
discontinuation of free interim benefits
while an Application to Register

Difference

Permanent Residence or Adjust Status is
pending, as well as the introduction of
fees for Form I–589, Application for
Asylum and for Withholding of
Removal and Form I–182D,
Consideration of Deferred Action for
Childhood Arrivals (Renewal).36 Some
immigration benefit request volumes
include estimated fee-paying volumes
from CBP.37

TABLE 5—FEE-PAYING PROJECTION COMPARISON
Average annual
FY 2016/2017
fee-paying
projection

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Immigration benefit request

I–90 Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card ...............................................
I–102 Application for Replacement/Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival-Departure Document
I–129 Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Subtotal .....................................................
I–129H1 ..................................................................................................................
I–129H2A— ............................................................................................................
Named Beneficiaries ..............................................................................................
I–129H2B—Named Beneficiaries ..........................................................................
I–129L ....................................................................................................................
I–129O ...................................................................................................................
I–129CW, I–129E&TN, and I–129MISC ................................................................
I–129H2A—Unnamed Beneficiaries ......................................................................
I–129H2B—Unnamed Beneficiaries ......................................................................
I–129F Petition for Alien Fiance´(e) ...............................................................................
I–130 Petition for Alien Relative ...................................................................................
I–131/I–131A Application for Travel Document Subtotal ..............................................
I–131 Application for Travel Document .................................................................
I–131 Refugee Travel Document for an individual age 16 or older ......................
I–131 Refugee Travel Document for a child under the age of 16 ........................
I–131A Application for Carrier Documentation ......................................................
I–140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker ....................................................................
I–290B Notice of Appeal or Motion ...............................................................................
36 See section V.C. Fee Waivers of this preamble
for more information on the proposed changes.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

Average annual
FY 2019/2020
fee-paying
projection

718,163
9,499
427,778
N/A

682,722
7,155
553,266
423,304

¥35,442
¥2,344
125,488
N/A

N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
39,277
907,512
194,461
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
88,602
20,955

3,962
2,256
41,502
25,456
43,491
8,981
4,315
47,923
976,398
322,829
291,068
20,714
1,248
9,799
161,000
20,705

N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
8,646
68,886
128,368
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
72,398
¥250

37 See section V.R. Fees Shared by CBP and
USCIS of this preamble for more information.

PO 00000

Frm 00012

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Difference

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

62291

TABLE 5—FEE-PAYING PROJECTION COMPARISON—Continued
Average annual
FY 2016/2017
fee-paying
projection

Immigration benefit request

Difference

8,961
473,336
14,673
171,616
N/A
5,811
N/A
42,724
0
17
39

4,224
510,926
14,000
223,903
163,000
6,142
768
67,000
0
25
10

¥4,737
37,590
¥673
52,287
N/A
331
N/A
24,276
0
8
¥29

91
162,533
397,954
746
1,988
N/A
10,828

100
148,918
1,846,491
768
1,368
396,000
11,147

9
¥13,615
1,448,537
22
¥620
N/A
319

3,562

3,500

¥62

N/A
609

340
530

N/A
¥79

400
882
257
36
3,593
631,655
360
23,491
46,870
N/A

520
950
1012.5
4
3,873
811,730
107
23,458
49,826
46,857

120
68
756
¥32
280
180,075
¥253
¥34
2,956
N/A

N/A
41,902

2,970
58,098

N/A
16,196

N/A
N/A
N/A

260
22,780
7,672

N/A
N/A
N/A

N/A
N/A

6,085
20,711

N/A
N/A

N/A
472,511
3,605
2,410

590
572,425
4,650
2,550

N/A
99,914
1,045
140

Subtotal ..................................................................................................................

4,929,707

7,789,861

2,860,154

Biometric Services ........................................................................................................
Grand Totals ..........................................................................................................

2,598,639
7,528,346

N/A
7,789,861

N/A
261,515

I–360 Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er) or Special Immigrant ...................................
I–485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status ........................
I–526 Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur ...........................................................
I–539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status .........................................
I–589 Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal ....................................
I–600/600A; I–800/800A Orphan Petitions and Applications .......................................
I–600A/I–600 Supplement 3 Request for Action on Approved Form I–600A/I–600 ....
I–601A Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver ............................................................
I–687 Application for Status as a Temporary Resident ................................................
I–690 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility ..........................................
I–694 Notice of Appeal of Decision ..............................................................................
I–698 Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under
Section 245A of the INA) ..........................................................................................
I–751 Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence ....................................................
I–765 Application for Employment Authorization ..........................................................
I–800A Supplement 3 Request for Action on Approved Form I–800A ........................
I–817 Application for Family Unity Benefits ..................................................................
I–821D Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Renewal) ...............
I–824 Application for Action on an Approved Application or Petition ...........................
I–829 Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions on Permanent Resident Status ..............................................................................................................................
I–881 Application for Suspension of Deportation or Special Rule Cancellation of Removal .........................................................................................................................
I–910 Application for Civil Surgeon Designation ..........................................................
I–924 Application For Regional Center Designation Under the Immigrant Investor
Program .....................................................................................................................
I–924A Annual Certification of Regional Center ...........................................................
I–929 Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U–1 Nonimmigrant .........................
N–300 Application to File Declaration of Intention .......................................................
N–336 Request for a Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings ...............
N–400 Application for Naturalization ............................................................................
N–470 Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization purposes ......................
N–565 Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document ..................
N–600/600K Naturalization Certificate Application Subtotal .........................................
N–600 Application for Certificate of Citizenship ....................................................
N–600K Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate Under Section
322 ......................................................................................................................
Inadmissibility Waiver Subtotal .....................................................................................
I–191 Application for Relief Under Former Section 212(c) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act (INA) ....................................................................................
I–192 Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant .................
I–193 Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa ..........................................
I–212 Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission into the U.S. After
Deportation or Removal .....................................................................................
I–601 Application for Waiver of Ground of Excludability .......................................
I–612 Application for Waiver of the Foreign Residence Requirement (Under
Section 212(e) of the INA, as Amended) ...........................................................
USCIS Immigrant Fee ...................................................................................................
G–1041 Genealogy Index Search Request ..................................................................
G–1041A Genealogy Records Request .......................................................................

2. Completion Rates

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Average annual
FY 2019/2020
fee-paying
projection

USCIS completion rates are the
average hours per adjudication of an
immigration benefit request. They
identify the adjudicative time required
to complete (render a decision on)
specific immigration benefit requests.
The completion rate for each benefit
type represents an average. Completion
rates reflect what is termed ‘‘touch
time,’’ or the time an employee with
adjudicative responsibilities actually
handles the case. This does not reflect
‘‘queue time,’’ or time spent waiting, for
example, for additional evidence or
supervisory approval. Completion rates

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

do not reflect the total processing time
applicants, petitioners, and requestors
can expect to wait for a decision on
their case after USCIS accepts it.
USCIS requires employees who
adjudicate immigration benefit requests
to report adjudication hours and case
completions by benefit type.
Adjudication hours are divided by the
number of completions for the same
time period to determine an average
completion rate. In addition to using
this data to determine fees, completion
rates help determine appropriate
staffing allocations to handle projected
workload. The USCIS Office of

PO 00000

Frm 00013

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Performance and Quality (OPQ), field
offices, and regional management
scrutinize the data to ensure accuracy.
When data is inconsistent and/or
anomalies are identified, the OPQ
contacts the reporting office to resolve
and make necessary adjustments. USCIS
has confidence in the data, given the
consistency of reporting over the last
several years. The continual availability
of the information enables USCIS to
update cost information for each fee
review.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62292

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 6—COMPLETION RATES PER BENEFIT REQUEST
[Projected adjudication hours/completion]
Service-wide
completion
rate

Immigration benefit request

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

I–90 Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card .....................................................................................................................
I–102 Application for Replacement/Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival-Departure Document ......................................................................
I–129H1 ...............................................................................................................................................................................................
I–129H2A—Named Beneficiaries ........................................................................................................................................................
I–129H2B—Named Beneficiaries ........................................................................................................................................................
I–129L ..................................................................................................................................................................................................
I–129O .................................................................................................................................................................................................
I–129CW, I–129E&TN, and I–129MISC ..............................................................................................................................................
I–129H2A—Unnamed Beneficiaries ....................................................................................................................................................
I–129H2B—Unnamed Beneficiaries ....................................................................................................................................................
I–129F Petition for Alien Fiance´(e) ......................................................................................................................................................
I–130 Petition for Alien Relative ..........................................................................................................................................................
I–131 Application for Travel Document ...............................................................................................................................................
I–131 Refugee Travel Document for an individual age 16 or older ....................................................................................................
I–131 Refugee Travel Document for a child under the age of 16 ......................................................................................................
I–131A Application for Carrier Documentation ....................................................................................................................................
I–140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker ..........................................................................................................................................
I–290B Notice of Appeal or Motion .....................................................................................................................................................
I–360 Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er) or Special Immigrant ..........................................................................................................
I–485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status ..............................................................................................
I–526 Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur .................................................................................................................................
I–539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status ................................................................................................................
I–589 Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal ...........................................................................................................
I–600/600A; I–800/800A Orphan Petitions and Applications ..............................................................................................................
I–600A/I–600 Supplement 3 Request for Action on Approved Form I–600A/I–600 ...........................................................................
I–601A Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver ...................................................................................................................................
I–687 Application for Status as a Temporary Resident ......................................................................................................................
I–690 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility ................................................................................................................
I–694 Notice of Appeal of Decision .....................................................................................................................................................
I–698 Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A of the INA) ...............................
I–751 Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence ..........................................................................................................................
I–765 Application for Employment Authorization ................................................................................................................................
I–800A Supplement 3 Request for Action on Approved Form I–800A ...............................................................................................
I–821D Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Renewal) ......................................................................................
I–817 Application for Family Unity Benefits ........................................................................................................................................
I–824 Application for Action on an Approved Application or Petition .................................................................................................
I–829 Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions on Permanent Resident Status ....................................................................
I–881 Application for Suspension of Deportation or Special Rule Cancellation of Removal .............................................................
I–910 Application for Civil Surgeon Designation .................................................................................................................................
I–924 Application For Regional Center Designation Under the Immigrant Investor Program ............................................................
I–924A Annual Certification of Regional Center .................................................................................................................................
I–929 Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U–1 Nonimmigrant ...............................................................................................
N–300 Application to File Declaration of Intention ..............................................................................................................................
N–336 Request for a Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings (Under Section 336 of the INA) ..................................
N–400 Application for Naturalization ...................................................................................................................................................
N–470 Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization purposes .............................................................................................
N–565 Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document ........................................................................................
N–600 Application for Certificate of Citizenship ..................................................................................................................................
N–600K Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate Under Section 322 .........................................................................
I–191 Application for Relief Under Former Section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) .........................................
I–192 Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant ...............................................................................................
I–193 Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa ........................................................................................................................
I–212 Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission into the U.S. After Deportation or Removal .........................................
I–601 Application for Waiver of Ground of Excludability .....................................................................................................................
I–612 Application for Waiver of the Foreign Residence Requirement (Under Section 212(e) of the INA, as Amended) .................
USCIS Immigrant Fee .........................................................................................................................................................................

USCIS does not list completion rates
for the following immigration benefit
requests, forms, or other services, due to
the special nature of their processing as
explained below:
• USCIS Immigrant Fees. USCIS does
not adjudicate applications for an
immigrant visa. Rather, individuals
located outside of the United States

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

apply with a Department of State (DOS)
overseas consular officer for an
immigrant visa. If DOS issues the
immigrant visa, the individual may
apply with a U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) officer at a port of
entry for admission to the United States
as an immigrant. This fee represents

PO 00000

Frm 00014

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

0.19
0.77
1.10
1.92
2.00
2.23
1.90
1.62
0.50
0.58
0.67
0.86
0.25
0.27
0.25
1.01
1.46
1.32
1.65
1.63
8.65
0.51
4.10
2.22
1.90
2.64
N/A
1.05
1.10
3.76
1.30
0.20
1.90
0.12
0.91
0.78
8.15
2.00
1.81
34.95
10.00
2.60
2.68
3.05
1.57
4.02
0.89
1.08
1.57
2.10
0.97
0.30
2.71
3.29
0.53
N/A

USCIS’ costs to create and maintain files
and to issue permanent resident cards to
individuals who go through this
process. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(D),
proposed 8 CFR 106.2(c)(3).
• Refugee Processing and Other
Forms Exempt from Fees. These
immigration benefit requests may use
completion rates to determine staffing

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

levels. However, USCIS does not list
completion rates for these workloads
because these are exempt from paying a
fee:
Æ Credible Fear;
Æ Reasonable Fear;
Æ Registration for Classification as a
Refugee, Form I–590;
Æ Application By Refugee For Waiver
of Grounds of Excludability, Form I–
602;
Æ Refugee/Asylee Relative Petition,
Form I–730;
Æ Application for T Nonimmigrant
Status, Form I–914;
Æ Petition for U Nonimmigrant
Status, Form I–918; and
Æ Application for Posthumous
Citizenship, Form N–644.
• Temporary Protected Status (TPS).
DHS proposes not to rely on TPS fee
revenue for recovering USCIS’
operational expenses, consistent with
previous fee rules. See 81 FR 73312–3.
TPS designations may be terminated
under current law or may cease due to
a reduction in the eligible population.
Termination of the program, in whole or
in part, after the fees are set would
result in unrealized revenue and a
commensurate budgetary shortfall. After
the fee schedule is effective, fees cannot
be adjusted until the next fee schedule
notice and comment rulemaking. Thus,
temporary programs subject to
termination based on changed
circumstances are generally not
included in the fee setting model. As
such, USCIS excludes the completion
rate for Form I–821, Application for
Temporary Protected Status, from
discussion in this rule because DHS
cannot change the initial statutory
registration fee permitted under section
244(c)(1)(B) of the INA or establish a reregistration fee for TPS. USCIS will
continue to charge the biometric
services fee, where required, and the fee
for an employment authorization
document, as permitted under 8 U.S.C.
1254b.
3. Assessing Proposed Fees
Historically, as a matter of policy,
DHS uses its discretion to limit fee
increases for certain immigration benefit
request fees that would be overly
burdensome on applicants, petitioners,
and requestors if set at recommended
ABC model output levels.38 Previous
proposed IEFA fee schedules referred to
limited fee increases as ‘‘low volume
reallocation’’ or ‘‘cost reallocation.’’ 39
38 See

footnotes 15 and 16.
FY 2016/2017 proposed fee schedule used
both phrases. See 81 FR 26915. The FY 2010/2011
and FY 2008/2009 proposed fee schedules used the
phrase ‘‘low volume reallocation.’’ See 75 FR 33461
and 72 FR 4910, respectively.
39 The

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

Despite the two separate phrases, the
calculation for both is the same. In the
FY 2016/2017 fee rule, USCIS
calculated an 8 percent limited fee
increase for certain immigration benefit
request fees.40 For this proposed rule,
USCIS calculated a limited fee increase
of 5 percent using the same
methodology as the previous rule.41
As such, DHS proposes that the
following immigration benefit request
fees are limited to a 5 percent increase
above the current fees:
• Form I–290B, Notice of Appeal or
Motion.
• Form I–360, Petition for Amerasian,
Widow(er) or Special Immigrant.
• Form I–600, Petition to Classify
Orphan as an Immediate Relative.
• Form I–600A, Application for
Advance Processing of an Orphan
Petition.
• Form I–600A/I–600, Supplement 3,
Request for Action on Approved Form
I–600A/I–600.42
• Form I–800, Petition to Classify
Convention Adoptee as an Immediate
Relative.
• Form I–800A, Application for
Determination of Suitability to Adopt a
Child from a Convention Country.
• Form I–800A, Supplement 3,
Request for Action on Approved Form
I–800A.
The proposed increase of
approximately 5 percent may vary
slightly due to rounding. DHS rounds
all IEFA fees to the nearest $5
increment.
In order for the proposed fee schedule
to recover full cost, DHS proposes that
other fees be increased to offset the
projected cost of the 5 percent limited
fee increase. Similarly, DHS proposes
that other fees increase to offset a
projected increase in workloads that are
exempt from paying fees or that are
capped at a fee less than what the ABC
model indicates that they should pay. In
this proposed rule, DHS refers to the
process of recovering full cost for
40 The 8 percent increase was the percentage
difference between the current fees and the model
output before reallocation, weighted by fee-paying
volume. See 81 FR 73296. The model output is a
projected fee-paying unit cost from the ABC model.
It is projected total cost divided by projected feepaying receipts. While each fee review may
calculate a different percentage, the formula for the
calculation remains the same.
41 In the docket for this proposed rule, the FY
2019/2020 Immigration Examinations Fee Account
Fee Review Supporting Documentation has more
information. See the Cost Reallocation column of
Appendix Table 3: Proposed Fees by Immigration
Benefit Request.
42 DHS explains the purpose of this new proposed
form in section V.M.3 of this preamble. Request for
Action on Approved Application for Advance
Processing of an Orphan Petition or Petition to
Classify Orphan as an Immediate Relative, Form I–
600A/I–600 Supplement 3.

PO 00000

Frm 00015

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62293

workloads without fees or the shifting of
cost burdens among benefit request fees
as a result of other policy decisions as
cost reallocation.
Some proposed fees are significantly
higher than the current fees. In some
cases, this is because DHS proposes to
not limit those fee increases, as it has
done in the past, for policy reasons.
Previous fee schedules limited the
increase for certain immigration benefit
requests, such as most naturalization
related forms.43 See 81 FR 26915–6. In
this proposed rule, DHS proposes to not
limit the fee increase to 5 percent for the
following immigration benefit requests:
• Form I–601A, Provisional Unlawful
Presence Waiver.
• Form I–765, Application for
Employment Authorization.
• Form I–929, Petition for Qualifying
Family Member of a U–1 Nonimmigrant.
• Form N–300, Application to File
Declaration of Intention.
• Form N–336, Request for a Hearing
on a Decision in Naturalization
Proceedings.
• Form N–400, Application for
Naturalization.
• Form N–470, Application to
Preserve Residence for Naturalization
Purposes.
If DHS were to propose limited fee
increases for these immigration benefit
requests, then other proposed fees
would have to increase to recover full
cost. For example, if DHS were to
propose limited fee increases for all of
the immigration benefit request fees that
were limited in the previous fee rule,
then some proposed fees could increase
by as much as $1,185, with the average
of those changes being an increase of
$12 per immigration benefit request.
The rationale for some of these
proposed changes is further discussed
later in the preamble. See section V.
Proposed Changes in the FY 2019/2020
Fee Schedule.
Public commenters generally do not
support fee increases. A fee decrease
may be more popular. Generally, there
are several potential ways to reduce
IEFA fees:
1. Reduce projected costs or use other
funding sources (such as appropriations,
other fee accounts, carryover, or
recoveries of prior year obligations);
2. Increase projected fee-paying
receipts; or
3. Reduce completion rates.
As discussed earlier, reducing the
projected costs to equal the projected
revenue would risk degrading USCIS
43 See V.O. Naturalization (discussion on the
proposed naturalization fees).

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62294

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

operations funded by the IEFA.44
Likewise, other funding sources are
insufficient or unavailable.45 Some of
the proposed fees would be even higher
without an increase to projected feepaying receipts.46 As discussed in the
previous section, completion rates are
based on reported adjudication hours
and completions. USCIS does not
believe the level of effort for future
adjudications will decrease.
C. Fee-Related Issues Noted for
Consideration
DHS identifies a number of issues that
do not affect the FY 2019/2020 fee
review but do merit some discussion.
DHS does not propose any changes
related to the issues discussed in this
section. USCIS may discuss these issues
in future biennial fee reviews or in
conjunction with other USCIS fee rules.
DHS welcomes comments on all facets
of the FY 2019/2020 fee review, this
proposed rule, and USCIS fees in
general, regardless of whether changes
have been proposed here.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

1. Accommodating E-Filing and Form
Flexibility
DHS attempts, as it did in the FY
2016/2017 fee rule, to propose fees
based on form titles instead of form
numbers to avoid prescribing fees in a
manner that could undermine the
conversion of USCIS to electronic
processing. See proposed 8 CFR 106.
Form numbers are included for
informational purposes, but are not
intended to restrict the ability of USCIS
to collect a fee for a benefit request that
falls within the parameters of the
adjudication for which the fee is
published. As USCIS modernizes its
processes and systems to allow more
applicants, petitioners, and requestors
to file applications online, the agency
may collect fees for immigration benefit
requests that do not have a form number
or do not have the same form number
as described in regulations. This could
occur, for example, if USCIS developed
an online version of a request that
individuals often submit with
applications for employment
authorization. In this situation, USCIS
may find it best to consolidate the two
requests without separately labelling the
different sections related to the relevant
form numbers. DHS would still collect
the required fee for the underlying
immigration benefit request as well as
the request for employment
44 See section IV.A.3., Costs and Revenue
Differential, of this preamble.
45 See id. and section III. Basis for the Fee Review.
46 See section V.C.3., Proposed Fee Waiver
Changes, for more information.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

authorization, but the actual online
request would not necessarily contain
form numbers corresponding to each
separate request.
Similarly, USCIS may determine that
efficiency would be improved by
breaking a paper form into separate
paper forms. For instance, USCIS could
separate Form I–131, Application for
Travel Document, into a separate form
and form number for advance parole,
humanitarian parole, refugee travel
documents, or reentry permits. In this
example, USCIS could continue to
charge the current Form I–131 fee. This
structure permits USCIS to change
forms more easily without having to
perform a new fee review each time the
agency chooses to do so.
2. Processing Time Outlook
As discussed in the Cost and Revenue
Differential section of this preamble,
USCIS anticipates having insufficient
resources to process its projected
workload. USCIS estimates that it will
take several years before USCIS backlogs
decrease measurably. USCIS
experienced an unexpectedly high
volume of immigration benefit requests
in FY 2016 and FY 2017. In FY 2018,
USCIS implemented measures to reduce
the backlog, such as adjudicating
asylum workload on a last-in-first out
basis.47 As explained in the Cost
Projections section of this preamble,
projected workloads for FY 2019 and FY
2020 exceed current workload capacity,
thereby requiring additional staff.
A number of uncertainties remain that
impede efficient case processing and
timely decision making. One
uncertainty is how to define the specific
elements of the screening and national
security vetting that USCIS will employ.
This new framework will likely involve
greater use of social media screenings
and more in-person interviews of
applicants for certain immigration
benefits.48 In addition, USCIS believes
that the growing complexity of the case
adjudication process over the past few
years has also contributed to higher
completion rates. For example, it takes
more time for officers to adjudicate each
case. (See section IV.B.2. Completion
Rates.)
47 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services,
USCIS to Take Action to Address Asylum Backlog,
available at https://www.uscis.gov/news/newsreleases/uscis-take-action-address-asylum-backlog
(last reviewed/updated Feb. 2, 2018).
48 USCIS, USCIS to Expand In-Person Interview
Requirements for Certain Permanent Residency
Applicants, https://www.uscis.gov/news/newsreleases/uscis-to-expand-in-person-interviewrequirements-for-certain-permanent-residencyapplicants (last reviewed/updated Aug. 28, 2017).

PO 00000

Frm 00016

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Through this rule, USCIS expects to
collect sufficient fee revenue to fund
additional staff that will support FY
2019/2020 workload projections as well
as perform more national security
vetting and screening. While USCIS is
committed to ensuring the integrity of
the immigration system and
safeguarding national security, it is also
committed to reducing processing times
and the current backlog, without
sacrificing proper vetting checks, by
identifying ways to increase efficiency,
ensuring the successful transition from
paper-based to electronic processing,
and increasing adjudicative resources.
For example, USCIS is transitioning
non-adjudicative work from
adjudicators to other staff, centralizing
the delivery of information services
through the USCIS Contact Center, and
leveraging electronic processing and
automation.
Applicants, petitioners, and
requestors can track the status of their
immigration benefit requests online by
using their receipt number or by
creating an online account at https://
uscis.gov/casestatus. They may also
make an ‘‘outside normal processing
time’’ case inquiry for any benefit
request pending longer than the time
listed for the high end of the range by
submitting a service request online at
https://egov.uscis.gov/e-request/Intro.do
or calling the USCIS Contact Center at
1–800–375–5283.
USCIS also expects to improve the
user experience as it continues to
transition to online filing and electronic
processing of immigration applications
and petitions. With the new personcentric electronic case processing
environment, USCIS will possess the
data necessary to provide near-real-time
processing updates on the status and
time period lapsed between actions for
each individual case. This enables
greater transparency to the public on
how long it will take to process each
case as it moves from stage to stage (for
example, biometrics collection,
interview, and decision).
USCIS is committed to providing
applicants, petitioners, and requestors
with relevant information when they
need it. As a result, USCIS is
transforming how it calculates and posts
processing time information in an effort
to improve the timeliness of such
postings, but more importantly to
achieve greater transparency. USCIS
will continue to provide processing
times in an accurate and transparent
fashion.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

V. Proposed Changes in the FY 2019/
2020 Fee Schedule
A. Clarify Dishonored Fee Check RePresentment Requirement and Fee
Payment Method
In the FY 2016/2017 fee rule, DHS
amended the regulations regarding how
USCIS treats a benefit request
accompanied by fee payment (in the
form of check or other financial
instrument) that is subsequently
returned as not payable. See 81 FR
73313–15 (Oct. 24, 2016); 8 CFR
103.2(a)(7)(ii) and 8 CFR 103.7(a)(2). If
a financial instrument used to pay a fee
is returned as unpayable after one representment, USCIS rejects the filing
and imposes a standard $30 charge. See
id. In the preamble to the FY 2016/2017
fee rule, DHS stated that, to make sure
a payment rejection is the result of
insufficient funds and not due to USCIS
error or network outages, USCIS
(through the U.S. Department of the
Treasury (Treasury)) will resubmit
rejected payment instruments to the
appropriate financial institution one
time. See 8 CFR 103.2(a)(7)(ii)(D). While
DHS’s intent was to submit only checks
that were dishonored due to insufficient
funds, some stakeholders have
interpreted the re-presentment as
applying to any check DHS has
deposited that is returned as unpayable.
Although the Treasury check clearance
regulations permit an agency to redeposit a check dishonored due to
insufficient funds, they prohibit
submitting checks dishonored for other
reasons for clearance a second time. See
31 CFR 210.3(b); 2016 NACHA
Operating Rules & Guidelines: A
Complete Guide to Rules Governing the
ACH Network, Subsection 2.5.13.3
(limiting re-depositing a check to those
that are returned due to ‘‘Not Sufficient
Funds,’’ ‘‘NSF,’’ ‘‘Uncollected Funds,’’
or comparable). To comply with the
Treasury regulations, DHS is proposing
in this rule that if a check or other
financial instrument used to pay a fee is
returned as unpayable because of
insufficient funds, USCIS will resubmit
the payment to the remitter institution
one time. If the remitter institution
returns the instrument used to pay a fee
as unpayable a second time, USCIS will
reject the filing. USCIS will not redeposit financial instruments returned
as unpayable for a reason other than
insufficient funds. Proposed 8 CFR
103.2(a)(7)(ii)(D).
In addition, DHS proposes that it may
reject a request that is accompanied by
a check that is dated more than 365 days
before the receipt date. Currently,
USCIS policy is to reject a check that is
dated more than a year before it is

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

submitted. However, that policy is not
codified, and DHS has been sued or
threatened with litigation multiple
times when a check that was dated more
than a year before it was submitted was
the basis of a rejection that caused the
requestor to miss an important deadline.
For example, USCIS has permitted an
applicant to submit Form I–821 after the
deadline 49 and adjudicated a Form I–
485 filed after the applicant’s U
nonimmigrant status had expired
because his initial, timely filing was
rejected because it contained a check
that was more than one year old. See 8
CFR 245.24(b)(2)(ii) (requiring the
applicant to hold U nonimmigrant
status at the time of application.). While
most personal and business checks do
not expire, they become what is known
as ‘‘stale dated’’ six months after they
are written. This is because many things
may change in six months that may
affect the check’s validity or the original
reason that it was written. Accordingly,
the Uniform Commercial Code 50
provides that a bank may delay access
to the funds from or is not obligated to
deposit, cash, honor, or pay a stale
check. USCIS projects that it will
receive an average 7,789,861 fee
payments per year.51 It is important that
its requirements for payment
instruments provide certainty and
minimize the likelihood of a payment
being dishonored. Although commercial
banks use a guideline of six months,
DHS proposes to reject only year-old
checks to provide requestors with more
flexibility in case there are delays with
their filing. Rejecting a check that is
dated more than a year earlier is also
consistent with the time limit for a
check issued by the U.S. Treasury. See
31 CFR 245.3(a) (‘‘Any claim on account
of a Treasury check must be presented
to the agency that authorized the
issuance of such check within one year
after the date of issuance of the check
or within one year after October 1, 1989,
whichever is later.’’). Rejection of a stale
check will not be mandatory, so USCIS
will still have the authority to waive the
check date requirement in exigent
circumstances.
DHS also proposes that USCIS may
require that certain fees be paid using a
certain payment method or that certain
fees cannot be paid using a particular
49 See

8 CFR 244.17(a) (‘‘Applicants for periodic
re-registration must apply during the registration
period provided by USCIS.’’).
50 A bank is under no obligation to a customer
having a checking account to pay a check, other
than a certified check, which is presented more
than six months after its date, but it may charge its
customer’s account for a payment made thereafter
in good faith. UCC 4–404 (2002).
51 See section IV.B.1.b. Fee-Paying Volume in this
preamble.

PO 00000

Frm 00017

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62295

method. Proposed 8 CFR 106.1(b). For
example, USCIS may require that a
request be submitted by using Pay.gov,
a secure portal which transmits an
applicant’s payment information
directly to the U.S. Treasury for
processing, or may preclude the use of
certain payment types such as cashier’s
check and money orders for the
payment of a particular form or when
payments are made at certain offices.
The proposed change provides that
payment method will be provided in the
form instructions (including for online
filing) or by individual notice (a bill,
invoice, appointment confirmation,
etc.); therefore, requestors will be
clearly notified of any limitations on the
payment method for the request they are
filing. About 80 percent of all USCIS
filings are received via a Lockbox that
is well versed in intake and depositing
of multiple payment types. However,
the requirements and circumstances for
the filing of some requests do not permit
lockbox submission and intake, and the
request must be filed at a particular
office or in person. Various offices, such
as field offices, embassies, and
consulates, are limited in the method of
payment that they can receive or
process. Additionally, certain payment
methods such as checks or cash require
time-intensive procedures for cashiers
and their supervisors to input,
reconcile, and verify their daily receipts
and deposits. Generally, federal agency
offices must deposit money that they
receive on the same day that it is
received. See 31 U.S.C. 3720(a); 31 CFR
206.5; Treasury Financial Manual Vol.
1, Part 5, Chapter 2000, Section 2055.52
There are additional requirements and
guidance for timely record keeping and
redundancy in personnel that similarly
increase workload and processing costs.
See 31 U.S.C. 3302(e); Treasury
Financial Manual Vol. 1, Part 5, Chapter
2000, Section 2030; see also U.S.
Government and Accountability Office
(GAO) GAO–14–704G Standards for
Internal Control in the Federal
Government (2014).53 The time that
USCIS spends complying with payment
processing requirements can be used to
adjudicate cases. This proposed change
would also permit USCIS to reduce
52 Agencies may accumulate deposits less than
$5,000 until they reach $5,000 or a given Thursday.
U.S. Treasury, Treasury Financial Manual Vol 1,
Part 5, Chapter 2000, https://tfm.fiscal.treasury.gov/
v1/p5/c200.html.
53 Principal 10, Design Control Activities, states
that management should control information
processing and segregation of duties to reduce risk,
and accurate and timely record transactions. GAO,
Standards for Internal Control in the Federal
Government (Sept. 10, 2014), https://www.gao.gov/
assets/670/665712.pdf.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

62296

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

administrative burdens and processing
errors associated with fee payments.
DHS is also clarifying that fees are
non-refundable regardless of the result
of the immigration benefit request or
how much time the request requires to
be adjudicated. As provided in 8 CFR
103.2(a)(1) USCIS filing fees generally
are non-refundable and must be paid
when the benefit request is filed. As
discussed fully in this rule, DHS is
authorized to establish fees to recover
the costs of providing USCIS
adjudication and naturalization
services. While the fees are to recover
the processing costs of adjudications,
the fees are due when filing an
immigration benefit request before the
request will be considered received and
the requestor will receive a receipt date.
See 8 CFR 103.2(a)(7)(ii)(D). A benefit
request will be rejected if it is not
submitted with the correct fee(s). Thus
the fee is due at filing and is not
refundable, regardless of how much
time passed from filing to approval, or
if the request is denied or approved.
Nevertheless, USCIS has recently,
greatly, expanded acceptance of credit
cards for the payment of USCIS fees. To
our misfortune, the increased
acceptance of credit cards for the
payment of USCIS fees has resulted in
a sizeable increase in the number of
disputes filed with credit card
companies challenging the retention of
the fee by USCIS. Disputes are generally
filed by requestors whose request was
denied, who have changed their mind
about the request, or assert that the
service was not provided or
unreasonably delayed. Troublingly,
USCIS loses many of these dispute
because the credit card companies agree
with the cardholder and have
determined that USCIS fails to
adequately warn the cardholder that the
fee is not refundable and due regardless
of the result or time required. As the
dollar amount of fees paid with credit
cards continues to increase, this result
has the potential to have a significant
negative fiscal effect on USCIS fee
receipts. Therefore, DHS is proposing to
clarify that fees will not be refunded no
matter the result of the benefit request
or how much time the adjudication
requires. Proposed 8 CFR 103.2(a)(1). In
the event that the bank that issues the
credit card rescinds the payment of the
fee to USCIS, USCIS reserves the
authority to invoice the responsible
party (applicant, petitioner, requestor)
and pursue collection of the unpaid fee

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

in accordance with 31 CFR 900–904
(Federal Claims Collection Standards).
B. Eliminate $30 Returned Check Fee
DHS also proposes to amend its
regulations to remove the $30 charge for
dishonored payments. See 8 CFR
103.7(a)(2)(i). USCIS data indicates that
the cost of collecting the $30 fee
outweighs the benefits to the
government derived from imposing and
collecting the fee. For example, in FY
2016, USCIS collected a total of
$416,541 from the $30 returned check
fee while the financial service provider
billed $508,770 to collect the $30 fee.
Furthermore, USCIS does not retain the
$30 fee for deposit into the IEFA with
other immigration benefit request fees;
thus the $30 fee does not provide
revenue to USCIS. Agencies may
prescribe regulations establishing the
charge for a service or thing of value
provided by the agency. See 31 U.S.C.
9701. However, federal agencies are not
required to impose fees as a general
matter, nor does DHS or USCIS have a
specific statutory authorization or
requirement to do so. Therefore, DHS is
not required to charge a returned check
fee. DHS proposes to remove the $30 fee
from regulations.
C. Fee Waivers
1. Background
Currently, USCIS may waive the fee
for certain immigration benefit requests
when the individual requesting the
benefit is unable to pay the fee. See 8
CFR 103.7(c). To request a fee waiver,
the individual must submit a written
waiver request for permission to have
their benefit request processed without
payment. Under the current regulation,
the waiver request must state the
person’s belief that he or she is entitled
to or deserving of the benefit requested
and the reasons for his or her inability
to pay and include evidence to support
the reasons indicated. See 8 CFR
103.7(c)(2). There is no appeal of the
denial of a fee waiver request. See id.
The statute authorizing USCIS to
establish fees does not specifically
mention fee waivers and fee exemptions
for any type of applicant or group, or
any criteria for fee waivers.54 The
54 USCIS is primarily funded by application and
petition fees. Under INA 286(m), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m),
DHS has the authority to establish the fees it
charges for immigration and naturalization services
to recover the full costs of such services, including
those provided without charge, and to recover costs
associated with the administration of the fees

PO 00000

Frm 00018

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

statute does not require that DHS
provide certain services for free, but it
authorizes DHS to set USCIS fees at a
level that will recover the full costs of
adjudication and naturalization services
provided ‘‘including the costs of similar
services provided without charge to
asylum applicants or other
immigrants.’’ 55 DHS interprets that
provision as authorizing it to provide
certain services for free in all cases in
the form of fee exemptions,56 or free
when certain criteria are met in the form
of a waiver. DHS has always
implemented fee waivers based on need,
and since 2007, has precluded fees
waivers for individuals that have
financial means as a requirement for the
status or benefit sought. See 72 FR 4912.
However, the William Wilberforce
Trafficking Victims Protection
Reauthorization Act of 2008 (TVPRA) 57
requires DHS to permit certain
applicants to apply for fee waivers for
‘‘any fees associated with filing an
application for relief through final
adjudication of the adjustment of
status.’’ 58 DHS interprets ‘‘any fees
associated with filing an application for
relief through final adjudication of the
adjustment of status’’ 59 to mean that, in
addition to the main immigration
benefit request that accords a status,
(such as Form I–360, Petition for
Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special
Immigrant or Form I–485, Application
to Register Permanent Residence or
Adjust Status) applicants must have the
opportunity to request a fee waiver for
any form associated with the main
benefit application up to and including
the adjustment of status application.60
Table 7 lists the immigration categories
for which DHS must provide an
opportunity to request a fee waiver for
main immigration benefit requests and
associated forms in accordance with
TVPRA.61
collected. Therefore, the fees are set at a level that
is intended to recover the full cost of USCIS
operations.
55 See INA sec. 286(m), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m).
56 See, e.g., proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(45) and (46)
(codifying no fee for an Application for T
Nonimmigrant Status and Petition for U
Nonimmigrant Status).
57 See title II, subtitle A, sec. 201(d)(3), Public
Law 110–457, 122 Stat. 5044 (2008); INA sec.
245(l)(7), 8 U.S.C. 1255(l)(7).
58 See id.
59 See id.
60 Certain USCIS forms are not listed in 8 CFR
103.7(b) and therefore have no fee. See proposed 8
CFR 106.2 for proposed fees.
61 INA sec. 245(l)(7), 8 U.S.C. 1255(l)(7).

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

62297

TABLE 7—STATUTORY FEE WAIVER CATEGORIES AND ASSOCIATED FORMS
Category

Main immigration benefit requests 62

Associated forms

Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) self-petitioners.63

• Form I–360, Petition for Amerasian,
Widow(er), or Special Immigrant (no fee).
• Form I–485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status.
• Form I–751, Petition to Remove Conditions
on Residence.

Victims of Severe Form of Trafficking (T
visas).66

• Form I–914, Application for T Nonimmigrant
Status (no fee).
• Form I–914, Supplement A, Application for
Family Member of T–1, Recipient (no fee).
• Form I–914, Supplement B, Declaration of
Law Enforcement Officer for Victim of Trafficking in Persons (no fee).
• Form I–485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status.

Victims of Criminal Activity (U visas).67

• Form I–918, Petition for U Nonimmigrant
Status (no fee).
• Form I–918, Supplement A, Petition for
Qualifying Family Member of U–1 Recipient
(no fee).
• Form I–918, Supplement B, U Nonimmigrant Status Certification (no fee).
• Form I–929, Petition for Qualifying Family
Member of a U–1 Nonimmigrant.
• Form I–485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status.
• Form I–765V, Application for Employment
Authorization for Abused Nonimmigrant
Spouse (no fee).
• EOIR–42B, Application for Cancellation of
Removal and Adjustment of Status for Certain Nonpermanent Residents (DOJ form
and immigration judge determines fee waiver).
• I–821, Application for Temporary Protected
Status.
• Biometric Services Fee ................................

• Form I–131, Application for Travel Document.64
• Form I–212, Application for Permission to
Reapply for Admission into the United
States After Deportation or Removal.
• Form I–290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion.
• Form I–601, Application for Waiver of
Grounds of Inadmissibility.
• Form I–765, Application for Employment
Authorization (no fee for principals).65
• Form I–131, Application for Travel Document.
• Form I–192, Application for Advance Permission to Enter as a Nonimmigrant.
• Form I–193, Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa.
• Form I–290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion.
• Form I–539, Application to Change/Extend
Nonimmigrant Status.
• Form I–601, Application for Waiver of
Grounds of Inadmissibility.
• Form I–765, Application for Employment
Authorization (no fee for principals).
• Form I–131, Application for Travel Document.
• Form I–192, Application for Advance Permission to Enter as a Nonimmigrant.
• Form I–193, Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa.
• Form I–290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion.
• Form I–539, Application to Extend/Change
Nonimmigrant Status.
• Form I–765, Application for Employment
Authorization (no fee for principals).
• None.

Battered spouses of A, G, E–3, or H nonimmigrants.68
Battered spouses or children of a lawful permanent resident or U.S. citizen under INA
240A(b)(2).69
Temporary Protected Status.70

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Before 2007, USCIS couldwaive any
fee, even if a fee waiver was
62 Some immigration benefit requests may not
have a fee for the specific category.
63 See INA sec. 101(a)(51), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(51);
INA section 245(l)(7), 8 U.S.C. 1255(l)(7). Public
Law 110–457, 122 Stat. 5044 (Dec. 23, 2008); 22
U.S.C. 7101 et seq.
64 Currently, fees for Form I–131 are exempt if
filed in conjunction with a pending or concurrently
filed Form I–485 with fee that was filed on or after
July 30, 2007. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(M)(4).
However, DHS proposes changes to this policy in
this rule as explained later in this preamble.
65 Form I–360 allows a principal self-petitioner to
request an EAD incident to case approval without
submitting a separate Form I–765. Form I–765 is
required for employment authorization requests by
derivative beneficiaries.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

inconsistent with the underlying
immigration benefit request. For
example, before 2007, USCIS could
waive fees for companies seeking to
sponsor foreign workers, individuals
seeking status based on substantial
business investments, or individuals
seeking to sponsor foreign relatives to
whom the sponsors must provide
66 See INA sec. 101(a)(15)(T), 8 U.S.C.
1101(a)(15)(T) (T nonimmigrant status for victims of
a severe form of trafficking in persons).
67 See INA sec. 101(a)(15)(U), 8 U.S.C.
1101(a)(15)(U) (U nonimmigrant status for victims
of certain criminal activity).
68 See INA sec. 106, 8 U.S.C. 1105a.
69 See INA sec. 240A(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. 1229b(b)(2),
and INA sec. 245(l)(7), 8 U.S.C. 1255(l)(7).
70 See INA sec. 244, 8 U.S.C. 1254a.

PO 00000

Frm 00019

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

• Form I–601, Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility.

• Form I–131, Application for Travel Document.
• Form I–601, Application for Waiver of
Grounds of Inadmissibility.
• Form I–765, Application for Employment
Authorization.

financial support. See 72 FR 4912. Since
2007, USCIS has limited the fees that
may be waived under 8 CFR 103.7(c)(3)
based on the general premise that fee
waivers must be consistent with any
financial considerations that apply to
the status or benefit sought. See 8 CFR
103.7(c)(1)(ii).
Following the FY 2010/2011 fee rule,
USCIS also issued policy guidance to
streamline fee waiver adjudications and
make them more consistent across
offices and form types nationwide. See
Policy Memorandum, PM–602–0011.1,
Fee Waiver Guidelines as Established by
the Final Rule of the USCIS Fee
Schedule; Revisions to Adjudicator’s
Field Manual (AFM) Chapter 10.9, AFM
Update AD11–26 (Mar. 13, 2011) (‘‘Fee

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62298

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Waiver Policy’’). The Fee Waiver Policy
clarified acceptable measures of income
and documentation that individuals
may present to demonstrate they are
unable to pay a fee when requesting a
fee waiver. In June 2011, USCIS issued
Form I–912, Request for Fee Waiver, as
a standardized form with instructions to
request a fee waiver in accordance with
the Fee Waiver Policy.71 USCIS
previously engaged in a holistic analysis
of the individual’s finances to determine
inability to pay. See, e.g., William R.
Yates, Field Guidance on Granting Fee
Waivers Pursuant to 8 CFR 103.7(c)
(Mar. 4, 2004). The 2011 Fee Waiver
Policy established a streamlined process
where USCIS would usually waive the
entire fee and the biometric services fee
for forms listed in 8 CFR 103.7(c)(3) for
applicants who at time of filing the fee
waiver request with the benefit
application: 72
• Were receiving a means-tested
benefit;
• Had a household income at or
below 150 percent of the Federal
Poverty Guidelines (FPG); or
• Were experiencing extreme
financial hardship such as unexpected
medical bills or emergencies.
The FY 2010/2011 fee rule also
authorized the USCIS director to
approve and suspend exemptions from
fees or provide that the fee may be
waived for a case or class of cases that
is not otherwise provided in 8 CFR
103.7(c). See 75 FR 58990; 8 CFR
103.7(d).
On October 25, 2019, USCIS
published the updated Form I–912 73
and corresponding policy guidance in
the USCIS Policy Manual 74 that
removed the means-tested benefit as a
criterion in the fee waiver request
determination, clarified that the
submission of Form I–912 is required to
request a fee waiver, and clarified some
of the evidence requirements. The new
71 The form and its instructions may be viewed
at http://www.uscis.gov/i-912. The proposed
version is available for review in the docket for this
proposed rule.
72 See Policy Memorandum, PM–602–0011.1, Fee
Waiver Guidelines as Established by the Final Rule
of the USCIS Fee Schedule; Revisions to
Adjudicator’s Field Manual (AFM) Chapter 10.9,
AFM Update AD11–26 (Mar. 13, 2011); AFM
Chapter 10.9(b).
73 The Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
approved the form changes on October 24, 2019,
available at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/
PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=201910-1615-006# (last
visited October 25, 2019).
74 See USCIS, Policy Alert PA 2019–06, Fees for
Submission of Benefit Requests, available at https://
www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/policymanual/
updates/20191025-FeeWaivers.pdf (last visited Oct.
25, 2019) (revising the USCIS interpretation of
unable to pay in 8 CFR 103.7(c)).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

policy will be effective on December 2,
2019. Therefore, as of December 2, 2019
an individual would be eligible to
request a fee waiver based on one of two
criteria for inability to pay, i.e., if he or
she:
• Has a household income at or below
150 percent of the FPG; or
• Is experiencing extreme financial
hardship such as unexpected medical
bills or emergencies.
This proposed rule further limits forms
eligible for a fee waiver and the criteria
to establish eligibility for a fee waiver.
2. Cost of Fee Waivers
The U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO), an independent,
nonpartisan agency that works for
Congress, describes equity of federal
user fees as a balancing act between two
principles:
• Beneficiary-pays; and
• Ability-to-pay.75
This proposed rule emphasizes the
beneficiary-pays principle. Under the
beneficiary-pays principle, the
beneficiaries of a service pay for the cost
of providing that service. See GAO–08–
386SP at pp. 7–12.
Under the ability-to-pay principle,
those who are more capable of bearing
the burden of fees should pay more for
the service than those with less ability
to pay. IEFA fee exemptions, fee
waivers, and reduced fees for low
income households adhere to this
principle. Applicants, petitioners, and
requestors who pay a fee cover the cost
of processing requests that are feeexempt, fee-waived, or fee-reduced. For
example, if only 50 percent of a benefit
request workload is fee-paying, then
those who pay the fee will pay twice as
much as they would if everyone paid
the fee. By paying twice as much, they
pay for their benefit request and the cost
of the same benefit request that someone
else did not pay for.
In prior years, USCIS fees have given
significant weight to the ability-to-pay
principle. In the FY 2016/2017 fee rule,
DHS noted that the estimated annual
forgone revenue from fee waivers and
exemptions has increased markedly,
from $191 million in the FY 2010/2011
fee review to $613 million in the FY
2016/2017 fee review. See 81 FR 26922
and 73307. In the FY 2016/2017
proposed rule, DHS estimated that the
increase in fee waiver accounted for 9
percent of the 21 percent weighted
average fee increase. See 81 FR 26910.
In the same proposed rule, DHS
provided notice that in the future it may
75 GAO, Federal User Fees: A Design Guide (May
29, 2008), available at https://www.gao.gov/
products/GAO-08-386SP.

PO 00000

Frm 00020

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

revisit the USCIS fee waiver guidance
with respect to what constitutes
inability to pay under 8 CFR 103.7(c).
See 81 FR 26922.
Each fee review plans for a certain
level of fee waivers, fee exemptions, and
other fee-paying policy decisions.
Ideally, no IEFA revenue is lost due to
fee waivers because USCIS plans for a
certain level of fee waivers and fee
exemptions. IEFA fees recover full cost,
including the estimated cost of feewaived and fee-exempt work. However,
USCIS does forgo revenue by allowing
fee waivers and fee exemptions. Forgone
revenue represents the total fees that fee
waiver or fee exempt applicants,
petitioners, and requestors would have
paid if they had paid the fees.
In the FY 2019/2020 fee review,
USCIS determined that without changes
to fee waiver policy, it would forgo
revenue of approximately $1,494
million. The proposed fee schedule
estimates $962 million forgone revenue
from fee waivers and fee exemptions.
The difference in forgone revenue is
$532 million. Without changes to fee
waiver policy, fees would increase by a
weighted average of 31 percent, which
is 10 percent more than in the proposed
fee schedule.
3. Proposed Fee Waiver Changes
As previously stated, INA sec. 286(m),
8 U.S.C. 1356(m) authorizes but does
not require that DHS set fees to recover
the costs of administering USCIS
adjudication and naturalization
services. That statute also authorizes
setting such fees at a level that will
recover the costs of services provided
without charge, but it does not require
that DHS provide services without
charge.76 Nevertheless, DHS (and
previously the INS) has provided fee
waivers based on need. See, e.g., 63 FR
43604, 43607 (stating, ‘‘The Service
often waives fees for this application
when the economic need exists. The
proposed rule stated, ‘For FY 1998, the
Service estimates that approximately 50
percent of the Form I–765 applications
will be processed at no charge to
applicants, at a total cost of $35.9
million.’ ’’). For the reasons stated in
this rule, DHS has determined that it is
necessary to utilize this statutory
discretion to establish the following
new requirements for waiving USCIS
fees.
76 Legislation enacted in 2008 requires that a fee
waiver be considered for certain requests. INA sec.
245(l)(7), 8 U.S.C. 1255(l)(7).

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

a. Limits on Eligible Forms and
Categories
Because of the costs of fee waivers,
and the inconsistency of current fee
waiver regulations with the beneficiary
pays principal, DHS proposes to limit
fee waivers to immigration benefit
requests for which USCIS is required by
law to consider a fee waiver or where
the USCIS Director exercises favorable
discretion as provided in the proposed
regulation. See proposed 8 CFR 106.3.
The proposed regulation would limit
the eligible forms and categories to
those listed in Table 7: Statutory Fee
Waiver Categories and Associated
Forms.77 Accordingly, many forms will
generally no longer be eligible for a fee
waiver,78 except in limited
circumstances where the law requires
that a waiver be made available based
on the circumstances of the applicant.
Forms that would generally no longer be
eligible for a fee waiver include the
following:
• Form I–90, Application to Replace
Permanent Resident Card;
• Form I–765, Application for
Employment Authorization;
• CNMI related petitions and
applications; 79
• Form I–485, Application to Register
Permanent Residence or Adjust
Status; 80
• Forms for applicants exempt from
the public charge inadmissibility
ground; 81
• Form I–751, Petition to Remove
Conditions on Residence;
77 Under the settlement agreement concluded in
American Baptist Churches v. Thornburgh, 760 F.
Supp. 976 (N.D. Cal. 1991) (ABC), ‘‘eligible class
members who can demonstrate that they fall within
the poverty guidelines as set forth in 45 CFR 1060.2
will not be required to pay the fee.’’ DHS will
continue to allow these applicants to request a fee
waiver. In 1991, the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) codified at 45 CFR 1060.2
(1990) the federal poverty guidelines issued by the
former HHS Office of Economic Opportunity/
Community Services Administration. The ABC
settlement agreement requires USCIS to waive fees
for those covered by the agreement who fall
squarely within the Federal Poverty Guidelines.
The requirements for a fee waiver proposed in this
rule are less restrictive than the subject settlement
agreement. See proposed 8 CFR 106.3(d).
78 Fee waivers would still be available at the
discretion of the USCIS Director, or as provided by
INA 245(l)(7), 8 U.S.C. 1255(l)(7). See proposed 8
CFR 106.3. An applicant, petitioner, or requestor
may not independently request that the Director
exercise this authority.
79 For example, Form I–129CW, Petition for
CNMI-Only a Nonimmigrant Transitional Worker,
and Form I–539, Application to Extend/Change
Nonimmigrant Status.
80 Certain categories may still be eligible for fee
waivers of an I–485, as identified in Table 7, as
provided by INA 245(l)(7), 8 U.S.C. 1255(l)(7).
81 For example, Form I–601, Application for
Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility, Form I–192,
Application for Advance Permission to Enter as
Nonimmigrant, and Form I–193, Application for
Waiver for Passport and/or Visa.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

62299

• Naturalization and citizenshiprelated forms.82
The Senate Appropriations
Committee Report that accompanied the
fiscal year 2017 Department of
Homeland Security Appropriations
Act 83 expressed concern about the
increased use of fee waivers, which
force those paying fees to absorb costs
for which they receive no benefit.84 DHS
believes that these changes would make
the fee increase more equitable for all
immigration benefit requests by
requiring fees for the service to be paid
by those who benefit.

c. Income Requirements
The poverty guidelines are used as an
eligibility criterion by many Federal
public benefit programs and USCIS to
determine income levels. The poverty
guidelines are a simplified version of
the poverty thresholds that the Census
Bureau uses to prepare its estimates of
the number of individuals and families
in poverty.86 Some federal programs use
a percentage multiple of the guidelines
(for example, 125 percent or 185 percent
of the guidelines), as noted in relevant
authorizing legislation or program
regulations.87 The poverty threshold or
line (100 percent of the FPG) is the
b. Eligibility Requirements
primary version of the federal poverty
Further, DHS proposes to generally
measure, as updated by the Census
limit fee waivers to individuals who
Bureau every year, and generally used to
have an annual household income of
estimate the number of Americans in
less than 125 percent of the FPG as
poverty each year.88
defined by the U.S. Department of
In the immigration context, USCIS
Health and Human Services (HHS).
uses 125 percent of the FPG as the
Notwithstanding these general
standard for public charge and affidavit
limitations, however, a fee waiver may
of support purposes.89 Congress also
be authorized in the USCIS Director’s
identified 125 percent of FPG as a
discretion, even for those benefit
requests not normally amenable to a fee threshold for a sponsor to support an
waiver,85 if an individual meets all three individual immigrant to meet the
requirements an affidavit of support in
of the following requirements:
inadmissibility
• Has an annual household income at the public charge
determination.90 The threshold for fee
or below 125 percent of the FPG as
waiver eligibility under current
defined by HHS;
regulations of 150 percent of the FPG is
• Is seeking an immigration benefit
higher than the threshold used in the
for which he or she is not required to
public charge and affidavit of support
submit an affidavit of support under
context. DHS believes limiting fee
INA section 213A, 8 U.S.C. 1183a, or is
waivers to households with incomes at
not already a sponsored immigrant as
or below 125 percent of the FPG, as
defined in 8 CFR 213a.1; and
proposed in this rule, would be
• Is seeking an immigration benefit
appropriate because it would be
for which he or she is not subject to the
consistent with the affidavit of support
public charge inadmissibility ground
requirements under INA sections
under INA section 212(a)(4), 8 U.S.C.
212(a)(4) and 213A, 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(4).
1182(a)(4).
In addition, DHS would update the
d. Subject to INA Section 212(a)(4) and
language in the regulation to codify that
Affidavit of Support Requirements
a person must submit a request for a fee
The current fee waiver regulation
waiver on the form prescribed by
allows people who are applying for
USCIS, as provided in the previous
Form I–912 notice and provide evidence several immigration benefits—advance
permission to enter as a nonimmigrant,
of household income such as federal
a waiver for passport and/or visa,
income tax transcripts.
adjustment of status, or for a waiver of
USCIS believes that making these
grounds of inadmissibility—to file a fee
changes to the fee waiver policy would
assure that fee paying applicants do not waiver request if they are not subject to
the public charge inadmissibility
bear the increasing costs caused by
ground. See 8 CFR 103.7(c)(4) (stating
application fees being waived.
that certain fees may be waived ‘‘only
82 Including Form N–400, Application for
for an alien for which a determination

Naturalization; Form N–470, Application to
Preserve Residence for Naturalization Purposes;
Form N–336, Request for a Hearing on a Decision
in Naturalization Proceedings; Form N–565,
Application for Replacement of Naturalization/
Citizenship Document; Form N–600, Application
for Certification of Citizenship; and Form N–600K,
Application for Citizenship and Issuance of
Certificate Under section 322.
83 See Public Law 115–31, div. F, 131 Stat. 135,
404.
84 See S. Rep. No. 114–264, at 125 (2016).
85 See proposed 8 CFR 106.3(b) and (c).

PO 00000

Frm 00021

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

86 See Annual Update of the HHS Poverty
Guidelines 84 FR 1167, 1168, available at https://
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-01/pdf/
2019-00621.pdf.
87 See id.
88 See ASPE, Poverty Guidelines, available at
https://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty-guidelines (last visited
Aug. 16, 2019).
89 See 8 CFR 212.22(b)(4)(i)(A).
90 See INA sec. 213A(f)(1)(E), 8 U.S.C.
1183a(f)(1)(E).

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62300

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

of their likelihood of becoming a public
charge under section 212(a)(4) of the Act
is not required at the time of an
application for admission or adjustment
of status’’). Consistent with this
provision, DHS is proposing that fee
waivers will not be available to
applicants who are subject to the public
charge inadmissibility ground.91
DHS also proposes to preclude fee
waivers for applicants who are subject
to an affidavit of support under INA
section 213A, 8 U.S.C. 1183a, or is
already a sponsored immigrant as
defined in 8 CFR 213a.1. Under the
Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA),
Congress provided that the affidavit of
support could be legally required and
enforced for certain immigration
categories.92 A sponsor generally must
demonstrate that he or she is able to
maintain the sponsored alien at an
annual income of not less than 125
percent of the FPG.93 Although sponsors
are not required to assist an alien with
immigration fees, a sponsor is generally
financially responsible for the alien;
thus, an alien with a sponsor should not
need a fee waiver. DHS has decided that
it is inconsistent with that law and its
stated objective that aliens be able to
meet their needs for applicants who
have a sponsor through an affidavit of
support to receive immigration benefits
for free, funded by others who are
paying their full immigration benefit
request fee. Therefore, USCIS believes
that limiting fee waivers to those
applicants who are not subject to
affidavit of support requirements is
consistent with congressional intent
under IIRIRA.’’ 94
DHS notes that the House Report on
Department of Homeland Security
Appropriations Bill, 2019 stated,
‘‘USCIS is expected to continue the use
of fee waivers for applicants who can
demonstrate an inability to pay the
naturalization fee. USCIS is also
encouraged to consider whether the
current naturalization fee is a barrier to
naturalization for those earning between
150 percent and 200 percent of the
federal poverty guidelines, who are not
currently eligible for a fee waiver.’’ H.
Rep. No. 115–948 at 61 (2018). USCIS
appreciates the concerns of this
91 See

generally 8 CFR 103.7(c)(4).
Div. C, Title V of Public Law 104–208, 110
Stat. 3009, 3009–670 (September 30, 1996).
93 See INA 213A. A sponsor who is on active duty
(other than active duty for training) in the U.S.
armed forces and who is petitioning for a spouse
or child only has to demonstrate the means to
maintain an annual income equal to at least 100
percent of the FPG.
94 See Div. C, Title V of Public Law 104–208, 110
Stat. 3009, 3009–670 (September 30, 1996).
92 See

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

recommendation and fully considered it
before publishing this proposed rule.
Nevertheless, DHS determined that the
current trends and level of fee waivers
are not sustainable. Work that USCIS
provides for free or below cost impacts
other fee-paying applicants by making
their fees higher so DHS can recover
USCIS full cost. DHS is trying to make
the USCIS fee schedule more equitable
for all applicants and petitioners. As
shown in the supporting documentation
for this rule, the number and dollar
volume of fee waiver requests and
foregone revenue has trended upward
during periods of economic
improvement. That indicates that,
should the economy worsen, the
number of fee waiver requests will
increase to a level that could threaten
the ability of USCIS to deliver programs
without disruption.
Violence Against Women Act
(VAWA) self-petitioners as defined
under INA 101(a)(51); T nonimmigrants;
U nonimmigrants; battered spouses of
A, G, E–3, or H nonimmigrants; battered
spouses or children of a lawful
permanent resident or U.S. citizen as
provided under INA sec. 240A(b)(2);
and TPS applicants are not subject to
the public charge inadmissibility
provision or the affidavit of support
requirements.
e. USCIS Director’s Discretionary Fee
Waivers and Emergency and Disaster
Relief
DHS proposes to retain the authority
in regulations for the Director of USCIS
to waive any fee for a case or specific
class of cases, if the Director determines
that such action would be in the public
interest and the action is consistent with
other applicable law. 8 CFR 103.7(d);
proposed 8 CFR 106.3(b). DHS is
concerned that the current authority
provides too much discretion, however,
and thus proposes to limit a Director’s
discretionary waiver to cases related to
one of the following: (1) Asylees; (2)
Refugees; (3) National security; (4)
Emergencies or major disasters declared
in accordance with 44 CFR part 206,
subpart B; (5) An agreement between the
U.S. government and another nation or
nations; or (6) USCIS error.
DHS also proposes to clarify the
discretionary authority of the Director to
authorize fee waiver requests for a case
or specific class of cases such as for
emergency and disaster relief including
tsunamis, wildfires, and hurricanes in
accordance with 44 CFR part 206,
subpart B. USCIS would continue to
notify the general public of eligibility
for fee waivers for specific forms under
this provision through policy or website
updates. Individuals who would qualify

PO 00000

Frm 00022

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

for such a fee waiver would still need
to meet the requirements to request a fee
waiver as provided in proposed 8 CFR
106.3(d). Proposed 8 CFR 106.3(d)
complies with 42 U.S.C. 5174b. That
law provides that the President, in
consultation with the Governor of a
State, may waive certain fees for an
individual or household who lives in a
federally declared disaster area,
including the following USCIS fees:
Form I–90, Form I–193, Form I–765,
Form N–300, Form N–565, and the
biometric services fee, which are forms
and services related to establishing
immigration status. DHS plans to carry
out this permissive authority through
the USCIS Director’s exercise of his or
her discretion to provide a specific class
of fee waivers for emergency and
disaster relief. See 84 FR 3957 (Feb. 13,
2019).
DHS acknowledges that the proposed
changes to the fee waiver policies would
be a significant change from past fee
waiver regulations and policies. Section
286(m) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1356(m),
authorizes DHS to set USCIS fees at an
amount necessary to recover the costs of
free adjudication and naturalization
services provided. It does not require
that DHS provide free services. In past
fee rules, DHS has made clear that it
would not authorize fee waivers where
such a waiver is inconsistent with the
benefit requested and that fee waiver
policy was based on economic
necessity, rather than providing certain
applicants with an advantage over
another. See 75 FR 58974. In addition,
DHS has responded to comments
requesting that it expand USCIS fee
waivers by stating that the financial
circumstances required to be eligible for
certain benefits, such as intercountry
adoptions, directly contradict the
rationale for shifting costs related to
such applications to others through fee
waivers. See 72 FR 29863. As previously
stated, fee waiver increases accounted
for 9 percent of the 21 percent weighted
average fee increase in the FY 2016/
2017 fee rule, and DHS stated that it
may revisit the USCIS fee waiver
guidance with respect to what
constitutes inability to pay under 8 CFR
103.7(c) because of the increasing costs
of providing free services through fee
waivers. See 81 FR 26922. Therefore,
DHS is not basing the proposed changes
to USCIS fee waiver policies upon
factual findings that contradict those
underlying the prior policy. In fact, the
changes proposed in this rule are
consistent with the direction that DHS
previously took regarding fee waivers
for emergency and disaster relief.
DHS appreciates that individuals who
in the past may have received a free

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
service from USCIS may no longer be
able to have their USCIS fees waived
after these proposed changes take effect.
However, to the extent that a person is
in the process of completing and filing
an immigration benefit request, has paid
for assistance in preparing their request,
including gathering necessary evidence
to support the request, this rule
provides public notice of the impending
policy change. As for applicants who
are not in the process of preparing a
benefit request, there is no action that
they would take as a result of assuming
they will receive a fee waiver after the
publication of this rule because they
will be placed on notice of the
likelihood of the proposed fee waiver
changes and provided sufficient time to
conform their behavior to the new
requirements before they take effect.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

f. Conforming Edits and Request for
Comments
DHS also proposes to make
conforming edits in its regulations to
remove references to fee waivers. See,
e.g., proposed 8 CFR 240.63(a), 8 CFR
244.17(a), and 8 CFR 245.15(c)(2)(iv)(B).
DHS also proposes to remove fee
waivers for Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) fees.
See proposed 8 CFR 214.2(e)(23)(xv),
(w)(14)(iii). DHS welcomes comment on
the proposed limits on who may file a
fee waiver request and for which forms
a fee waiver may be requested.
D. Fee Exemptions
The fee-setting authority under INA
section 286(m), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m),
authorizes DHS to set its fees for
adjudication and naturalization services
at a level to ensure recovery of the full
costs of providing all such services.
That provision does not require that
USCIS charge a fee for all of its services,
and it provides that USCIS may set fees
at less than full cost or provide services
for free. That authority necessarily
means that DHS may fund or subsidize
discounted or free USCIS operations
through the fees charged to other
unrelated filings. DHS has exercised its
discretion to provide free services in a
number of ways, such as by codifying
‘‘no fee,’’ $0 fee, or simply leaving the
fee regulations silent and not codifying
a fee for a particular service that it
provides.
In addition, the current 8 CFR
103.7(d) provision provides that the
USCIS Director may create an
exemption from certain fees ‘‘for a case
or specific class of cases that is not
otherwise provided in this section, if the
Director determines that such action
would be in the public interest and the
action is consistent with other

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

applicable law.’’ This authority is
limited to the Director and may only be
delegated to the USCIS Deputy Director.
An individual would not be permitted
to independently submit a request to the
USCIS Director to waive his or her fee.
Previous USCIS Directors have used this
authority to provide fee exemptions for
specific categories and groups of
immigrants.
Consistent with the discussion above
about the TVPRA, no law requires
USCIS to provide fee exemptions for
any immigration category listed below.
Application fees from other form types
have always been used to fund the costs
of processing fee-exempt filings. See,
e.g., 81 FR 73295. Continuing to exempt
these populations from paying
associated fees would result in the costs
of their requests being borne by the
other proposed fees.
DHS proposes to clarify the Director’s
fee exemption provision in proposed 8
CFR 106.3(f) to specify that fee
exemptions must be related to one of the
following:
• Asylees;
• Refugees;
• National security;
• Emergencies or major natural
disasters declared in accordance with 44
CFR part 206, subpart B; 95
• A diplomatic agreement or to
further relations between the U.S.
Government and other nations; or
• USCIS error.
Consistent with the proposed change
to the Director’s exemption criteria,
DHS proposes to remove the fee
exemptions for an initial request for an
employment authorization document
(Form I–765) for the following
classifications:
• Citizen of Micronesia, Marshall
Islands, or Palau;
• Granted Withholding of Deportation
or Removal;
• Temporary Protected Status if the
individual is filing an initial TPS
application and is under 14 years of age
or over 65 years of age; and
• Applicant for Asylum and
Withholding of Deportation or Removal.
The proposed changes for asylum
applicants and an Application for
Asylum and Withholding of Deportation
or Removal are discussed in a later
section of this preamble, V.P.2. Fee for
the Initial Application for Employment
Authorization while an Asylum Claim is
Pending.
DHS is proposing to continue to
exempt the following categories that are
95 This authority is proposed to extend only to a
Presidential declaration of a major disaster or an
emergency granted in accordance with 8 CFR part
206, subpart B.

PO 00000

Frm 00023

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62301

consistent with the proposed criteria for
a Director’s exemption:
• Form I–102, Application for
Replacement/Initial Nonimmigrant
Arrival/Departure Document:
Nonimmigrant military members of the
U.S. Armed Forces, noncitizen
participating in NATO or Partnership
for Peace Military Program under the
Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA).
• Form I–539, Application to Extend/
Change Nonimmigrant Status:
Noncitizen with Ambassador, Public
Ministry, or Career Diplomatic or
Consular Officer and their Immediate
Family and Attendant or Servant (A–1,
A–2, and A–3), Designated Principal
Resident Representative of a Foreign
Government and Immediate Family and
Attendant or Servant (G–1, G–2, G–3, G–
4, and G–5) or NATO nonimmigrants
status (NATO–1, NATO–2, NATO–3,
NATO–4, NATO–5, NATO–6, NATO–7,
and NATO–8).
• Form I–765, Application for
Employment Authorization: Asylees,
refugees, noncitizens paroled as
refugees, N–8 and N–9 Special
Immigrants under INA sections
101(a)(27)(I)(i) and (L); 96 Victims of
Severe Form of Trafficking in Persons
(T–1); Victim of Qualifying Criminal
Activity (U–1); dependents of Certain
foreign national organizations and
NATO; VAWA Self-Petitioner
principal; 97 an applicant who filed
USCIS Form I–485 on or after July 30,
2007, and before the effective date of
this rule, and paid the Form I–485 fee;
Taiwanese dependents of Taipei
Economic and Cultural Representative
Office TECRO E–1 employees.
1. Form I–765 Exemption Related to
Asylees and Refugees
USCIS is continuing to provide a fee
exemption for Form I–765, Application
for Employment Authorization, for
individuals who were granted asylum
(asylees) or who were admitted as
refugees. This long-standing policy is
consistent with Article 17(1) of the 1951
Convention relating to the Status of
Refugees (as incorporated in the 1967
Protocol relating to the Status of
Refugees), which states in pertinent part
‘‘The Contracting State shall accord to
refugees lawfully staying in their
territory the most favorable treatment
accorded to nationals of a foreign
96 N–8 is a parent of alien classed as SK3
(unmarried son or daughter of retired G–4
(international Organization Officer or Employee, or
Immediate Family) and an N–9 is the child of Child
of N–8 or SK1 (Retired International Organization
Employee, SK2 (spouse of SKI–1), SK4 (unmarried
son or daughter of G–3).
97 DHS notes that derivatives must pay the fees
but are eligible to request a fee waiver.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62302

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
E. Changes to Biometric Services Fee

country in the same circumstances, as
regards the right to engage in wageearning employment.’’
2. Exemptions Related to International
Organization Officers and to Agreement
Between the U.S. Government and
Other Nations
Under the International Organization
Immunities Act,98 certain
representatives of foreign governments
may be entitled to enjoy some
privileges, exemptions and immunities.
USCIS has several forms that provide for
NATO participants, ambassadors, and
foreign government representatives, as
described above. These groups of
individuals are limited in number.
DHS believes that continuing to
exempt these categories from the fees
provides for consistency with
agreements between the U.S.
Government and another nation or
nations, as well as concepts of
reciprocity and good relations with
other nations. Therefore, USCIS believes
that continuing the policy to exclude
these categories of applicants is
appropriate to comply with agreements
and promote good relations with other
nations.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

3. Exemptions Related to VAWA Benefit
Requests and to T and U Nonimmigrant
Status Categories
As previously discussed, TVPRA
requires DHS to permit certain
applicants to apply for fee waivers for
‘‘any fees associated with filing an
application for relief through final
adjudication of the adjustment of
status.’’ DHS interprets ‘‘any fees
associated with filing an application for
relief through final adjudication of the
adjustment of status’’ to mean that, in
addition to the main benefit application,
applicants must have the opportunity to
request a fee waiver for any form
associated with the main benefit
application up to and including the
adjustment of status application. The
fees for the VAWA, T, and U categories
for Form I–765 had previously been
exempted because of the humanitarian
nature of these programs and the
likelihood that individuals who file
requests related to the VAWA, T and U
categories would qualify for a fee waiver
if they request it. Thus it is more
efficient to exempt that population from
fees than to employ staff to review fee
waiver requests that would usually be
approved. Based on the same reasoning,
USCIS will continue to provide a fee
exemption for the Form I–765 for
VAWA, T and U categories.
98 59

Stat. 669, 22 U.S.C. 288.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

1. Incorporating Biometric Activities
Into Immigration Benefit Request Fees
DHS proposes to incorporate the
biometric services cost into the
underlying immigration benefit request
fees for which biometric services are
applicable. Currently, a separate $85
biometric services fee may apply
depending on the immigration benefit
request 99 or other circumstances. See 8
CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(C). USCIS provides
tables, forms, instructions and other
information to help individuals assess
whether they need to pay the biometric
services fee. USCIS rejects an
application, petition, or request that
fails to pay the separate biometric
services fee, if it applies. See 8 CFR
103.17(b). DHS proposes to incorporate
the cost of biometric services into the
underlying immigration benefit request
fees to simplify the fee structure, reduce
rejections of benefit requests for failure
to include a separate biometric services
fee, and better reflect how USCIS uses
biometric information.
DHS has broad statutory authority to
collect biometric information when
such information is ‘‘necessary’’ or
‘‘material and relevant’’ to the
administration and enforcement of the
INA. See, e.g., INA secs. 103(a),
235(d)(3), 264(a); 8 U.S.C. 1103(a),
1225(d)(3), 1304(a). The collection, use,
and reuse of biometric data are integral
to identity management, excluding
people with criminal backgrounds,
investigating and addressing national
security concerns, and maintaining
program integrity.
In previous fee rules, USCIS evaluated
the biometric activity cost as a single
biometric service fee separate from the
underlying application, petition, or
request. In the FY 2016/2017 fee review,
USCIS called the activity Perform
Biometric Services. See 81 FR 26913.
USCIS clarified that persons filing a
benefit request may be required to
appear for biometrics services or an
interview and pay the biometric services
fee. See 81 FR 26917 and 81 FR 73325.
There has been a single biometric
services fee for many years, which
includes four separate costs:
• FBI Name Checks;
• FBI fingerprints;
• Application Support Center (ASC)
contractual support; and
• Biometric service management
overall, including federal employees at
the ASC locations.

In the FY 2019/2020 fee review,
USCIS identified each of these four
costs as distinct activities in the ABC
model. These four activities replace the
single biometric activity that USCIS
used in previous fee reviews.100 USCIS
used volume estimates to allocate these
costs to the proposed immigration
benefit requests to which they generally
apply. The biometric volume estimates
were specific to the projected workload
for FBI Name Checks, FBI fingerprints,
and contractual support at the ASC
locations. In most cases, these estimates
use the average proportion of workload
for each immigration benefit request
over the last three years. If USCIS
believed the average of the last three
years did not reflect current plans, it
used more recent data or other
assumptions. These proportions of each
biometric service to receipts can vary,
because there is not always a one-to-one
relationship between a specific benefit
request and a biometric service. For
example, USCIS may not require a new
biometric collection at an ASC location
if it resubmits existing, stored biometric
information to the FBI. As another
example, some immigration benefit
requests, like adoption petitions and
applications, require that all adults in a
household submit biometric
information. See, e.g., 8 CFR
204.310(a)(3)(ii) and 204.310(b). As
such, a single adoption petition or
application may require one or more
adults to submit biometric information.
Using biometric volumes specific to
individual biometric activities enables
USCIS to better forecast biometric costs.
DHS proposes to incorporate biometric
costs into IEFA immigration benefit
request fees by using this biometric
activity-specific information in the
proposed fees. See proposed 8 CFR
106.2. DHS also proposes conforming
edits elsewhere in its regulations to
remove references to the separate
biometric services fee. See, e.g.,
proposed 8 CFR 204.5(p)(4),
204.310(a)(3)(ii), 212.19(e),
214.2(e)(23)(viii), 214.14(c)(1), 245.15
(h)(2), and 245a.12(d)(2).
The proposed changes in this rule
may assist USCIS when shifting to
enterprise-wide person-centric identity
management. For example, if USCIS
expands FBI Name Checks to additional
immigration benefit requests, then DHS
may propose to increase the fee as
appropriate for the affected immigration
benefit requests. This approach may

99 For a quick reference of the immigration benefit
requests that currently require biometric services
with the initial submission, see USCIS, Form G–
1055, Fee Schedule, available at https://
www.uscis.gov/g-1055.

100 The single biometric service activity was
called Perform Biometric Services in the FY 2016/
2017 fee review. See 81 FR 26913–4. Previously,
USCIS called the activity Capture Biometrics. See
75 FR 33459 and 72 FR 4897.

PO 00000

Frm 00024

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

ensure that the affected applicant,
petitioner, or requestor would pay the
appropriate fee rather than pass the cost
burden of all other biometric services to
the affected applicants, petitioners, or
requestors.
USCIS forecasts biometric workload
volumes by immigration benefit request
type in order to assign biometrics costs
to the appropriate immigration benefit
request. Assigning costs to the
underlying immigration benefit request
type may reduce the administrative
burden on USCIS to administer the
separate fee and make it easier for
applicants, petitioners, and beneficiaries
to calculate the total payment that is
due. However, USCIS proposes to retain
the separate biometric services fee for
specific workloads, as described in the
next section.
2. Retaining the Separate Biometric
Services Fee for Temporary Protected
Status
DHS has excluded from USCIS’ ABC
model for this proposed rule the costs
and revenue associated with Temporary
Protected Status (TPS), consistent with
the previous fee rule. See 81 FR 73312–
3. In addition, as noted above, DHS
proposes generally to eliminate a
separate biometric services fee and fund
biometric services from the revenue
received from the underlying
immigration benefit request fees.
However, DHS proposes to retain a
separate biometric services fee for TPS.
Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(37)(iii).
While the TPS registration fee is
capped by INA section 244a(c)(1)(B), 8
U.S.C. 1254a(c)(1)(B) at $50, DHS has
specific statutory authority to collect
‘‘fees for fingerprinting services,
biometric services, and other necessary
services’’ when administering the TPS
program. See 8 U.S.C. 1254b. USCIS
collects biometrics for TPS registrants.
USCIS requires certain TPS initial
applicants and re-registrants to pay the
biometric services fee in addition to the
fees for Form I–821, Application for
Temporary Protected Status, and Form
I–765, Application for Employment
Authorization, if they want employment
authorization. See Instructions for Form
I–821 (‘‘Applicants for both initial TPS
and for re-registration who are 14 years
of age and older must submit the $85
biometric services fee or a fee waiver
request.’’). Because the $50 TPS initial
application fee is capped by statute and
temporary by definition, USCIS has not
included it in its ABC model.
Nevertheless, the model output of other
fees indicates that the $50 amount
provided by statute does not recover the
full cost of adjudicating these benefit
requests.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

To reduce the costs of TPS that USCIS
must recover from fees charged to other
immigration benefit requests, DHS
proposes to use the permissive authority
in 8 U.S.C. 1254b(a) to require a $30
biometric services fee for TPS initial
applications and re-registrations.
Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(37)(iii). USCIS
based the proposed $30 biometric
services fee on the direct costs of
collecting, storing, and using biometric
information. Currently, USCIS pays
approximately $11.50 to the FBI for
fingerprinting results. USCIS calculated
that biometric collection, storage, and
use at an ASC costs approximately $19.
USCIS rounded the proposed fee to the
nearest $5 increment, similar to other
IEFA fees. The proposed fee is less than
the current $85 biometric services fee
because the current fee includes indirect
costs. The FY 2016/2017 fee rule held
the biometric services fee to $85, which
has not changed since the FY 2010/2011
fee rule.
3. Executive Office for Immigration
Review (EOIR) 101 Biometric Services
Fee
Similarly, DHS is maintaining the
current requirement that applicants
filing certain requests with EOIR submit
a biometric services fee. Proposed 8 CFR
103.7(a)(2). DHS, including USCIS,
handles all aspects of biometrics
collection for EOIR and conducts
background security checks for
individuals in immigration
proceedings.102 This fee is necessary to
recover the costs USCIS incurs from
performing that service for EOIR. When
individuals in immigration proceedings
before EOIR seek to file a motion,
appeal, or immigration benefit request
for relief or protection from removal
they are instructed to pay any
applicable biometrics and application
fees to DHS. See 8 CFR 1103.7(a)(3).103
As previously explained, while DHS
proposes to incorporate the costs of
biometric services into its underlying
immigration benefit request fees, DHS
101 Within the Department of Justice, there is an
Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR),
which includes a Director, the Board of Immigration
Appeals, the Office of the Chief Immigration Judge,
the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing
Officer, the Office of Legal Access Programs, and
other staff as the Attorney General or the Director
may provide. See 8 CFR 1003.0. USCIS provides
intake services for several requests filed with EOIR,
for which biometrics may be required.
102 Guidance is available at Immigration Benefits
in EOIR Removal Proceedings, at https://
www.uscis.gov/laws/immigration-benefits-eoirremoval-proceedings (last reviewed/updated Aug.
22, 2011).
103 This regulation provides that, except as
provided in 8 CFR 1003.8, EOIR does not accept
fees, and that fees relating to EOIR proceedings are
paid to DHS.

PO 00000

Frm 00025

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62303

has no authority to change the amounts
it receives from EOIR fees to pay the
costs it incurs for biometric services
(which includes background checks).
Under this proposed rule, DHS proposes
to adjust only the fee for those requests
filed with and processed by USCIS.
Consequently, USCIS has calculated and
proposes a biometric services fee of $30
that will be required for certain forms
for which it performs intake and
biometrics services on behalf of EOIR.
See proposed 8 CFR 103.7(a)(2).
F. Form I–485, Application To Register
Permanent Residence or Adjust Status
1. Interim Benefits
DHS proposes to require separate
filing fees when filing Form I–765,
Application for Employment
Authorization and Form I–131,
Application for Travel Document
concurrently with a Form I–485,
Application to Register Permanent
Residence or Adjust Status, or after
USCIS accepts their Form I–485 and
while it is still pending.
Usually, an applicant needs approval
of a principal immigration benefit
request before receiving ancillary
benefits such as employment
authorization and a travel document.
That is, USCIS only grants those
ancillary benefits after or at the same
time as it grants the principal
immigration status or benefit. In some
situations, however, an individual may
qualify for an interim ancillary benefit
because a benefit request is pending
adjudication. For example, a person
who applies for adjustment of status, in
certain instances, would be able to
apply for employment authorization
and/or a travel document based on the
pending immigration benefit request.
See 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(9). When this
occurs, these ancillary benefits are
referred to generally as ‘‘interim
benefits.’’ 104
Current DHS regulations provide that
applicants who properly file and pay
the required fee for a Form I–485 may
also file a Form I–765 and/or a Form I–
131 without paying any additional fees.
See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(M)(4) & (II).
Applicants may file Form I–765 and/or
Form I–131 concurrently with Form I–
485. Alternatively, they may file these
forms after USCIS accepts their Form I–
485 but while the Form I–485 is still
pending.
104 Individuals may derive interim benefits from
an Application for Temporary Protected Status,
Form I–821. Unless otherwise stated in this
proposed rule preamble, DHS uses interim benefits
to refer to benefits associated with Form I–485,
Application to Register Permanent Residence or
Adjust Status.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62304

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Before the FY 2008/2009 fee rule,
applicants paid separate fees to apply
for employment authorization or a travel
document while waiting on USCIS to
adjudicate Form I–485. Applicants who
had not yet received a green card but
who may have had to renew these
interim benefits paid any associated fees
for the renewals. See 72 FR 4894. Since
the FY 2008/2009 fee rule, USCIS has
allowed anyone who files Form I–485 to
file Forms I–131 and I–765 concurrently
(or after USCIS accepted their Form I–
485 but while the Form I–485 was still
pending) without a fee if they properly
filed a Form I–485 with the required
Form I–485 fee. Applicants who had not
yet received a green card but who may
have had to renew these interim benefits
did not have to pay any associated fees.
For the FY 2008/2009 fee rule, USCIS
determined that calculating fees for
Form I–485 at an amount that would
include interim benefits would improve

efficiency and save most applicants
money. See 72 FR 4894 and 29861–2. By
providing that the fees for interim
benefits would be included in the fee for
Form I–485, USCIS addressed the
perception that it benefits from
increased revenue by processing Forms
I–485 more slowly. See 72 FR 4894 and
29861–2. The FY 2010/2011 fee rule
continued the practice of ‘‘bundling’’
the fees for interim benefits and Form I–
485. See 75 FR 58968.
In the FY 2016/2017 fee review,
USCIS determined the workload volume
and fee-paying percentage of Forms I–
765 and Forms I–131 that are not
associated with Forms I–485. This
enabled USCIS to derive a fee-paying
percentage for standalone Forms I–765
and Forms I–131, meaning those forms
not filed concurrently with a Form I–
485. See 81 FR 26918 and 73300. By
isolating stand-alone interim benefit
applicants from those concurrently

filing Form I–485, USCIS more
accurately assessed fee-paying
percentages, fee-paying volumes, and
fees for all three benefit types. Id.
DHS proposes to return to charging
separate fees for Forms I–485, I–765,
and I–131. See proposed 8 CFR
106.2(a)(16); 8 CFR 106.2(a)(32); 8 CFR
106.2(a)(7)(iii). The proposed change
would be subject to phased
implementation. Specifically,
individuals who filed a Form I–485 after
July 30, 2007 (the FY 2008/2009 fee
rule) and before this proposed change
takes effect will continue to be able to
file Forms I–131 and I–765 without
additional fees for as long as their Form
I–485 is pending. Individuals who filed
before the FY 2008/2009 fee rule or after
this proposed change becomes effective
would pay separate fees for interim
benefits. The proposed changes are
summarized in Table 8. Dates are not
available for the proposed changes.

TABLE 8—FORM I–485 FILING DATES AND INTERIM BENEFITS
Bundled fee
applies?

Form I–485 filing date

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Before July 30, 2007 ...........................................................................................................................................................................
After July 30, 2007, but before [INSERT EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS RULE] .................................................................................
After implementing this proposed change with a final rule .................................................................................................................

DHS proposes this change in order to
reduce the proposed fee increases for
Form I–485 and other forms. For
example, in the previous fee rule, USCIS
isolated the workload volume and feepaying percentage of Forms I–765 and I–
131 that are not associated with Form I–
485. See 81 FR 26918. Isolating the
volumes for interim benefits reduced
the overall volume on the fee schedule
because we only counted interim benefit
volumes as part of the Form I–485
forecast instead of counting them twice
(for Form I–485 and the interim benefit).
Based on the total number of Form I–
485 applications that were concurrently
filed with Forms I–131 and I–765 on the
same day in FY 2017, USCIS expects
approximately 424,000 annual interim
benefit applications in FY 2019/2020
forecast. In the proposed fee schedule,
USCIS assumes these interim benefit
applicants will pay the applicable fees
for Forms I–485, I–131, and I–765. If
USCIS were to continue the previous
approach and assume these applicants
only pay the fee for Form I–485, then
the proposed fee for Form I–485 would
be $1,240, $120 or approximately 11
percent more than the proposed fee of
$1,120. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(U);
proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(16). Other
proposed fees would also change on this
hypothetical fee schedule. For example,

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

the Form I–90, Application to Replace
Permanent Resident Card, fee would
remain $455 in this hypothetical fee
schedule. The proposed Form I–90 fee
is $415, $40 or approximately 9 percent
less than the current $455 fee. See 8
CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(G); proposed 8 CFR
106.2(a)(1). This version of the fee
schedule has a weighted average fee
increase of 23 percent compared to the
21 percent average fee increase in
proposed fee schedule.105 In general, the
fees are higher in a fee schedule with
bundled fee interim benefits because it
has lower workload and fee-paying
volume than the proposed fee schedule.
This means there are fewer immigration
benefit requests for USCS to recover
projected costs in a fee schedule with
bundled fee interim benefits. DHS
proposes separate fees for interim
benefit applications and Form I–485
105 See footnote 6 for more information on the
weighted averages in the fee schedule. In a fee
schedule with free interim benefits, the sum of the
current fees multiplied by the projected FY 2019/
2020 fee-paying receipts for each immigration
benefit type, divided by the total fee-paying receipts
is $533. This is $3 higher than in the proposed fee
schedule because the fee-paying volumes are lower
when we assume free interim benefits. The
weighted average proposed fee is $655, $122 or 23
percent higher than the weighted average current
fee of $533 in this hypothetical fee schedule that
assumes free interim benefits.

PO 00000

Frm 00026

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

No.
Yes.
No.

applications in order to lower the
proposed fees for most other applicants,
petitioners, and requestors.
DHS proposes to reduce the Form I–
485 fee to $1,120, which is $20 or 2
percent less than the current $1,140 fee
that includes interim benefits. However,
the cost reducing effects of unbundling
interim benefit fees is partially offset by
several other factors that increase the
costs of the Form I–485. For example,
background check requirements have
increased.106 USCIS is also interviewing
a greater proportion of adjustment of
status applicants, requiring more time
and effort to adjudicate Form I–485.107
In addition, USCIS did not realize the
efficiency gains anticipated when it
bundled interim benefits. See 72 FR
4894. This is due to a number of
reasons. Mainly, annual numerical visa
limits established by Congress and high
demand have created long wait times for
some visa categories.108 Many
106 See, e.g., Exec. Order No. 13780, Protecting the
Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United
States, 82 FR 13209 (Mar. 6, 2017).
107 USCIS, USCIS to Expand In-Person Interview
Requirements for Certain Permanent Residency
Applicants, https://www.uscis.gov/news/newsreleases/uscis-to-expand-in-person-interviewrequirements-for-certain-permanent-residencyapplicants (last reviewed/updated Aug. 28, 2017).
108 See USCIS, Visa Retrogression at https://
www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-processes-

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
applicants must wait years for visas to
become available. While USCIS has
some control over its own allocation of
resources to address processing times
and backlogs, USCIS has no direct
control over delays caused by the U.S.
Department of State’s allocation of visa
numbers and Congress’ annual visa
numerical limits. USCIS has taken some
actions to alleviate the filing burden and
fees on those individuals whose Form I–
485 applications are still pending due to
the lack of available immigrant visas.
For example, DHS now provides EADs
with 2-year validity periods when the

final action date for determining visa
availability retrogresses.109
New applicants would only pay for
the benefits that they wish to receive as
a result of this proposal. In the FY 2008/
2009 and FY 2010/2011 fee rules, some
commenters stated they did not want to
pay for additional benefits they did not
want, need, or receive. See 72 FR
29861–3 and 75 FR 58968. This
proposal is in line with the beneficiarypays principle discussed in the Fee
Waivers section of this preamble.
Finally, this change would treat Form I–
485 applicants similarly to other
applicants who apply for interim

62305

benefits. In previous fee rules, bundled
interim benefit fees were only
associated with a pending Form I–485.
However, several other applications
may warrant interim benefits.110 DHS
has decided it is more equitable to treat
all of these petitioners and applicants
the same, regardless of the request that
may grant interim benefits. Some
applicants would pay significantly more
to adjust status and apply for one or
more interim benefits. Table 9 compares
the current fees for Form I–485
applicants that may bundle interim
benefits to the proposed fees without
bundling.

TABLE 9—CURRENT AND PROPOSED FEES FOR ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS WITH INTERIM BENEFITS
Immigration benefit request

Proposed fees

Difference

Percentage
difference

I–485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status ..........
I–765, Application for Employment Authorization ............................................
I–131, Application for Travel Document ..........................................................
Biometric Services Fee ....................................................................................

$1,140
410
575
85

$1,120
490
585
111 N/A

¥$20
80
10
¥85

¥2 percent
20
2
¥100

Total Fees for Form I–485 and biometric services .........................................

1,225

1,120

¥105

¥9

Total Fees for Forms I–485 and I–765 and biometric services ......................

1,610

385

31

Total Fees for Forms I–485 and I–131 and biometric services ......................

1,705

480

39

Total Fees for Form I–485, all interim benefits, and biometric services .........

2,195

970

79

2. Form I–485 Fee for Child Under 14,
Filing with Parent
Currently, Form I–485 has two fees.
The fee for an adult is $1,140, and the
fee for a child under the age of 14
concurrently filing with a parent is
$750. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(U). DHS
proposes to require payment of the
proposed $1,120 fee for all applicants,
including children under the age of 14
years concurrently filing Form I–485
with a parent.112 See 8 CFR
103.7(b)(1)(i)(U)(2); proposed 8 CFR
106.2(a)(16).
DHS no longer believes there is a cost
basis for the two different Form I–485
fees. As explained in the FY 2016/2017

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Current fees

and-procedures/visa-availability-priority-dates/
visa-retrogression (last reviewed/updated March 8,
2018).
109 USCIS may, in its discretion, determine the
validity period assigned to any document issued
evidencing an individual’s authorization to work in
the United States. See 8 CFR 274a.12(b).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

fee rule, USCIS does not track the
adjudication time for Form I–485 based
on the age of the applicant so there is
no data showing a cost difference
correlated to the difference in applicant
age. See 81 FR 73301. The FY 2016/
2017 fee rule calculated the $750 fee
using the model output to comply more
closely with the ABC methodology for
full cost recovery. See 81 FR 26919.
USCIS assumed that the $750 fee would
not include the cost of an EAD. Id. As
such, the completion rate for the $750
fee was lower than most adults. In
addition, children under the age of 14
do not typically pay the $85 biometric
services fee required for adults that
apply to adjust status. In the proposed

110 See

footnote 79.
noted earlier in this preamble, DHS
propose to eliminate the separate $85 fee in most
cases. See V.E. Changes to Biometric Services Fee
section for more information.
111 As

PO 00000

Frm 00027

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Form I–485 fee, USCIS assumes the
same completion rate and biometric
services for adults and children because
DHS proposes to separate interim
benefit request fees from the fee for
Form I–485. DHS believes that a single
fee for Form I–485 will reduce the
burden of administering separate fees
and better reflect the cost of
adjudication. This proposal will affect a
small percentage of Form I–485
applicants. In FY 2017 and 2018,
approximately 6 percent of Form I–485
applicants paid the $750 fee. See Table
10 for Form I–485 fee-paying receipts
and percentages for the two years.

112 The parent may be seeking classification as an
immediate relative of a U.S. citizen, a familysponsored preference immigrant, or a family
member accompanying or following to join a spouse
or parent under sections 201(b)(2)(A)(i),
203(a)(2)(A), or 203(d) of the INA; 8 U.S.C.
1151(b)(2)(A)(i), 1153(a)(2)(A), or 1153(d).

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62306

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 10—FORM I–485 FEE-PAYING RECEIPTS
Form I–485 applicant type

Percent of
FY 2017

FY 2018
fee-paying
receipts

Percent of FY
2018

Applicant under the age of 14 years who submits the application concurrently with the Form I–485 of a parent ...
All other fee-paying applicants for Form I–485 ...................

$750
1,140

32,870
511,432

6
94

33,290
496,113

6
94

Total ..............................................................................

N/A

544,302

100

529,403

100

In addition, DHS is proposing to
clarify the fee for applicants for
adjustment of status pursuant to INA
section 245(i). Such applicants are
required to properly file Form I–485
with fee along with Form I–485
Supplement A and the $1,000 statutory
fee, unless exempted by the statute.
USCIS proposes that the fee for the
Application to Adjust Status under
Section 245(i) of the Act, Form I–485,
Supplement A, be revised to clarify that
the Form I–485 Supplement A and the
$1,000 fee must be submitted when the
Form I–485 is filed or still pending. See
proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(17). An
applicant who has not paid the $1,000
statutory fee when applying for
adjustment of status has not been
lawfully adjusted and cannot satisfy the
‘‘lawfully admitted’’ requirement of INA
section 318, 8 U.S.C. 1429, for
naturalization. DHS is also proposing to
delete the text from the Form I–485,
Supplement A, that provides that there
is no fee when the applicant is an
unmarried child under 17 or the spouse
or the unmarried child under 21 of an
individual with lawful immigration
status and who is qualified for and has
applied for voluntary departure under
the family unity program. See 8 CFR
103.7(b)(1)(i)(V); proposed 8 CFR
106.2(a)(17). Those fee exemptions are
explicitly provided by statute and will
be included in the applicable form
instructions. See INA section
245(i)(1)(C), 8 U.S.C. 1255(i)(1)(C). It is
unnecessary to codify them in the Code
of Federal Regulations.
G. Continuing To Hold Refugee Travel
Document Fee to the Department of
State Passport Fee
Consistent with U.S. obligations
under Article 28 of the 1951 Convention
relating to the Status of Refugees,113
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

FY 2017
fee-paying
receipts

Current fee

113 The United States is party to the 1967 Protocol
Relating to the Status of Refugees, Jan. 31, 1967, 19
U.S.T. 6224, 606 U.N.T.S. 267 (1968), which
incorporates articles 2 through 34 of the 1951
Convention. The United States is not party to the
1951 Convention. See Sale v. Haitian Ctrs. Council,
Inc., 509 U.S. 155, 169 n.19 (1993) (‘‘Although the
United States is not a signatory to the Convention
itself, in 1968 it acceded to the United Nations
Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, which
bound the parties to comply with Articles 2 through

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

DHS proposes to continue to charge a
fee for refugee travel documents linked
to the fee for a U.S. passport book. See
75 FR 58972 (discussing Article 28
standards for assessing charges for a
refugee travel document). In previous
fee rules, DHS aligned the refugee travel
document fees to the sum of the United
States passport book application fee
plus the additional execution fee that
DOS charges for first time applicants.
See 81 FR 73301 and 75 FR 58972.
Since the FY 2016/2017 fee rule, DOS
increased the execution fee from $25 to
$35, a $10 or 40 percent increase. See
Department of State, Schedule of Fees
for Consular Services, Department of
State and Overseas Embassies and
Consulates-Passport Services Fee
Changes, 83 FR 4425 (Jan. 31, 2018).
Under this proposal, DHS would
increase refugee travel document fees by
a conforming amount. DHS refugee
travel document fees would be $145 for
adults and $115 for children under the
age of 16 years, consistent with current
U.S. passport fees. See proposed 8 CFR
106.2(a)(7)(i) and (ii).
H. Form I–131A, Carrier Documentation
DHS proposes to separate the fee for
Form I–131A, Application for Carrier
Documentation, from other travel
document fees and to expand the
population eligible to file Form I–131A.
See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(M)(3); proposed
8 CFR 106.2(a)(8). The proposed fee for
Form I–131A is $1,010, a $435 or 76
percent increase from the current $575
fee. Id. In 2016, USCIS began using
Form I–131A, Application for Carrier
Documentation. See 80 FR 59805. In the
FY 2016/2017 fee rule, DHS
implemented a fee that was calculated
using the total Form I–131 and I–131A
workload. See 81 FR 73294–5.
Currently, certain lawful permanent
residents (LPRs) may use Form I–131A
to apply for a travel document (carrier
documentation) if their Permanent
Resident Card (PRC), also known as a
Green Card or Form I–551, or their
reentry permit is lost, stolen, or
34 of the Convention as to persons who had become
refugees because of events taking place after January
1, 1951.’’).

PO 00000

Frm 00028

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

destroyed while outside of the United
States. Carrier documentation allows an
airline or other transportation carrier to
board the LPR without any penalty to
the airline or transportation carrier for
permitting an individual to board
without a visa or travel document. See
INA section 273, 8 U.S.C. 1323
(providing for a fine of $3,000 for each
noncitizen without proper
documentation). In order to be eligible
for carrier documentation, an LPR who
was traveling on a PRC must have been
outside the United States for less than
one year, and an LPR who was traveling
on a reentry permit must have been
outside the United States for less than
two years. Form I–131A is not an
application for a replacement PRC or
reentry permit.
DHS proposes a Form I–131A fee
separate from Form I–131 because Form
I–131A differs from other applications
for travel documents. The proposed
separate Form I–131A fee would be
more equitable because the form
requires a different adjudicative process
than Form I–131, including processing
by personnel outside of the United
States, which affects the projected cost
for Form I–131A. Other travel
documents may be adjudicated inside or
outside of the United States, while the
DOS Bureau of Consular Affairs, located
outside of the United States, will
process Form I–131A following the
closure of some USCIS international
offices.114 It generally costs more to
process Form I–131A outside of the
United States, and therefore, providing
carrier documentation is relatively more
expensive for USCIS than providing
other travel documents. The proposed
fee includes direct costs to account for
the fee DOS charges USCIS to adjudicate
Form I–131A applications, which is
114 See USCIS Will Adjust International Footprint
to Seven Locations at https://www.uscis.gov/news/
news-releases/uscis-will-adjust-internationalfootprint-seven-locations (last reviewed/updated
Aug. 9, 2019). The volume and cost projections
used in this rule were generated before planning to
adjust the international footprint of USCIS and do
not incorporate cost changes associated with the
adjustment. DHS will incorporate resulting cost
changes in future fee rules.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

approximately $385 each.115 In the FY
2018 interagency agreement and in this
proposed rule, USCIS projects that DOS
will receive approximately 6,199 Forms
I–131A each year. Separately, USCIS
forecasts that USCIS or DOS will receive
3,600 Forms I–131A each year based on
historic USCIS receipts. The total Form
I–131A receipt forecast for USCIS or
DOS is 9,799 per year.
DHS also proposes to expand the
population that is eligible to use Form
I–131A. DHS proposes to allow
individuals whose advance parole
documents or combination employment
authorization and advance parole cards
(combo cards) that are lost, stolen, or
destroyed to use Form I–131A to apply
for a carrier document while abroad.
Currently, there is no clear process for
individuals who lose advance parole
documents while they are abroad to
replace those documents. Since USCIS
does not issue advance parole
documents to individuals who are
abroad, it is not possible to replace a
lost or stolen advance parole document
until the individual returns to the
United States. Some have applied for
humanitarian parole to return to the
United States, which requires the
applicant to demonstrate an urgent
humanitarian reason or significant
public benefit as there is currently no
other appropriately established process
for such individuals to obtain a travel
document to return to the United States.
See generally INA sec. 212(d)(5), 8
U.S.C. 1182(d)(5); 8 CFR part 223.116
DHS proposes to permit those
individuals to file Form I–131A to
request carrier documentation, which
would allow them to board a return
flight to the United States despite their
advance parole document having been
lost, stolen, or destroyed. DOS
personnel would verify that such an
individual previously obtained the
advance parole authorization before
issuing the carrier documentation. At
this time, USCIS cannot estimate the
number of additional Form I–131A
requests that may be filed as a result of
this proposed change. However, USCIS
expects the increase in the number of
115 The FY 2018 interagency agreement between
Department of State and USCIS uses an Economy
Act rate of $385.88 for the adjudication. USCIS used
FY 2018 rates when calculating the proposed fees.
The FY 2019 interagency agreement between
Department of State and USCIS uses an Economy
Act rate of $352.15 for the adjudication.
116 For relevant guidance, see USCIS to Issue
Employment Authorization and Advance Parole
Card for Adjustment of Status Applicants:
Questions and Answers, https://www.uscis.gov/
news/questions-and-answers/uscis-issueemployment-authorization-and-advance-parolecard-adjustment-status-applicants-questions-andanswers (last reviewed/updated March 9, 2018).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

filings to be small. While USCIS does
not track Form I–131 humanitarian
parole requests made specifically for
carrier documentation, there were
approximately 200 Form I–131
submissions in FY 2017 without a
designation of the underlying basis of
the request. Individuals who used
humanitarian parole requests to obtain
carrier documentation would be a
subset of those approximately 200
receipts.
I. Separating Form I–129, Petition for a
Nonimmigrant Worker, Into Different
Forms
Currently, employers and other
qualified filers, such as agents,
sponsoring organizations and investors
(collectively referred to as a ‘‘benefit
requestor’’ or separately referred to as a
‘‘petitioner’’ or ‘‘applicant,’’ as
applicable) may use Form I–129,
Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, to
make a benefit request on behalf of a
current or future nonimmigrant worker
to temporarily perform services or labor,
or to receive training in the United
States.117 Using this single form,
petitioners or applicants can file
petitions or applications for many
different types of nonimmigrant
workers.118 Some classifications also
allow nonimmigrants to ‘‘self-petition’’
or file a petition or application on behalf
of themselves. Some nonimmigrant
classifications require use of Form I–129
supplemental forms, such as the H
Classification Supplement, or additional
separate forms, such as Form I–129S,
Nonimmigrant Petition Based on
Blanket L Petition. Certain petitioners or
applicants must pay statutory fees in
addition to a base filing fee in some
cases. For example, several statutory
fees exist for H and L nonimmigrant
workers.119 In some cases, petitioners or
applicants pay a single fee for multiple
nonimmigrant beneficiaries. USCIS
provides several optional checklists to
help navigate the specific requirements
of some nonimmigrant classifications.
117 See Temporary (Nonimmigrant) Workers at
https://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/
temporary-nonimmigrant-workers (last reviewed/
updated Sept. 7, 2011).
118 For example, nonimmigrants workers in the
following classifications: E–1, E–2, E–2C, H–1B, H–
2A, H–2B, H–3, L–1, O–1, O–2, P–1, P–1S, P–2, P–
2S, P–3, P–3S, Q–1, R–1, TN1, and TN2. See Form
I–129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker at
https://www.uscis.gov/i-129 (last reviewed/updated
Sept 11, 2018).
119 Various statutory fees apply to H and L
nonimmigrants. For more information on the fees
and statutory authority, see USCIS, H and L Filing
Fees for Form I–129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant
Worker, https://www.uscis.gov/forms/h-and-l-filingfees-form-i-129-petition-nonimmigrant-worker (last
updated/reviewed Feb. 2, 2018).

PO 00000

Frm 00029

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62307

DHS proposes to separate Form I–129
into several forms. These new forms
will incorporate information from the
various supplemental forms for specific
types of workers or nonimmigrant
classifications. DHS proposes different
fees for these new forms. The proposed
fees are calculated to better reflect the
costs associated with processing the
benefit requests for the various
categories of nonimmigrant worker. The
current base filing fee for Form I–129 is
$460. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(I). This
base filing fee is paid regardless of how
many nonimmigrant workers will
benefit from the petition or application,
the type of worker (for example,
landscaper, chef, scientist, computer
programmer, physician, athlete,
musician, etc.), whether an employee is
identified, and without differentiating
the amount of time it takes to adjudicate
the different nonimmigrant
classifications. Therefore, in order to
reflect these differences, DHS is
proposing a range of fees for petitions
and applications for nonimmigrant
workers, listed in Table 11 and
explained in the subsequent sections.
By splitting the form and proposing
several different fees, USCIS believes it
will simplify or consolidate the
information requirements for petitioners
and applicants as well as better reflect
the cost to adjudicate each specific
nonimmigrant classification. In
addition, DHS is proposing that, where
any new Form I–129 is filed for a named
worker who is present in the United
States, the petitioner must provide
USCIS with a valid domestic address for
the named worker(s) when submitting
the form. DHS welcomes comments on
the new forms.
In 2017, the DHS Office of Inspector
General (OIG) released a report on H–1B
visa participants. It discussed how
USCIS verifies H–1B visa participants
through the Administrative Site Visit
and Verification Program (ASVVP).
ASVVP includes site visits on all
religious worker petitioners, including R
nonimmigrants, as well as randomly
selected site visits for certain H–1B and
L workers to assess whether petitioners
and beneficiaries comply with
applicable immigration laws and
regulations. As a result of the OIG audit,
USCIS began to collect better
information on the costs associated with
ASVVP. For example, ASVVP now uses
unique project and task codes in the
USCIS financial system to track
spending. Additionally, USCIS tracks
ASVVP hours by form type in the Fraud
Detection and National Security Data
System, which USCIS uses to identify
fraud and track potential patterns. In the

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62308

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

FY 2019/2020 fee review, USCIS used
some of this new information to identify
distinct costs for these site visits. USCIS
used the ASVVP hours by immigration
benefit request to assign the appropriate
direct costs of site visits to Forms I–129.
The proposed fees would result in the

cost of ASVVP being covered by the fees
paid by the petitioners in proportion to
the extent to which ASVVP is being
used for that benefit request.
Additionally, USCIS now captures
adjudication hours for nonimmigrant
worker petitions based on the

classification for which the petition is
filed (see discussion of Completion
Rates in section IV.B.2). Therefore, the
proposed fees include the costs
associated with the estimated
adjudication hours for each of the new
petitions being proposed in this rule.

TABLE 11—PROPOSED FORM NUMBERS AND FORM TITLES FOR SEPARATING FORM I–129
Proposed form No.

Proposed form title

I–129CW .........................
I–129E&TN ......................
I–129H1 ...........................
I–129H2A ........................
I–129H2B ........................
I–129L .............................
I–129MISC ......................
I–129O ............................

Petition for a CNMI-Only Nonimmigrant Transitional Worker ..........................
Application for Nonimmigrant Worker: E or TN Classification .........................
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H–1 Classification .....................................
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H–2A Classification ..................................
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H–2B Classification ..................................
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: L Classification .........................................
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H–3, P, Q, or R Classification ..................
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: O Classification .........................................

2. Forms I–129H2A and I–129H2B,
Petitions for H–2A and H–2B Workers

1. Form I–129H1, Petition for
Nonimmigrant Worker: H–1
Classifications

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

DHS proposes to create Form I–
129H1, Petition for H–1B Nonimmigrant
Worker or H–1B1 Free Trade
Nonimmigrant Worker. See proposed 8
CFR 106.2(a)(3)(i). The H–1B
nonimmigrant program is for
individuals who will perform services
in a specialty occupation, services of
exceptional merit and ability relating to
a Department of Defense (DOD)
cooperative research and development
project, or services as a fashion model
of distinguished merit or ability; while
the H–1B1 nonimmigrant program is for
nationals of Singapore or Chile engaging
in specialty occupations. See INA sec.
101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), (H)(i)(b1); 8 U.S.C.
1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), (H)(i)(b1).120 DHS
proposes a fee of $560 for the Form I–
129H1. The proposed fee for a petitioner
to file Form I–129H1 more accurately
incorporates the direct cost of USCIS
fraud prevention efforts for H–1B
workers and other planned changes.
DHS does not propose any changes to
statutory fee amounts for certain H–1B
petitioners because it does not have the
authority to change the amount of these
fees.121
120 See H–1B Specialty Occupations, DOD
Cooperative Research and Development Project
Workers, and Fashion Models, https://
www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/temporaryworkers/h-1b-specialty-occupations-dodcooperative-research-and-development-projectworkers-and-fashion-models (last reviewed/updated
April 3, 2017).
121 Certain H–1B petitions may have to pay up to
$6,000 in statutory fees. DHS does not have the
authority to adjust the amount of these statutory
fees. USCIS does not keep most of the revenue. CBP
receives 50 percent of the $4,000 9–11 Response
and Biometric Entry-Exit fee and the remaining 50
percent is deposited into the General Fund of the
Treasury. USCIS retains 5 percent of the $1,500 or
$750 American Competitiveness and Workforce

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

Proposed fee(s)

DHS proposes to create Form I–
129H2A, Petition for Nonimmigrant
Worker: H–2A Classification, and Form
I–129H2B, Petition for Nonimmigrant
Worker: H–2B Classification. The H–2A
program allows U.S. employers or U.S.
agents who meet specific regulatory
requirements to bring foreign nationals
to the United States to fill temporary
agricultural jobs.122 The H–2B program
allows U.S. employers or U.S. agents
who meet specific regulatory
requirements to bring foreign nationals
to the United States to fill temporary
nonagricultural jobs.123 On March 6,
2017, OIG issued an audit report after
reviewing whether the fee structure
associated with H–2 petitions is
Improvement Act (ACWIA) fee. The remainder goes
to the Department of Labor and the National
Science Foundation. USCIS keeps one third of the
$500 Fraud Detection and Prevention fee, while the
remainder is split between the Department of State
and the Department of Labor. These statutory fees
are in addition to the current Form I–129 fee of
$460 and optional premium processing fee of
$1,410. See USCIS, H and L Filing Fees for Form
I–129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, https://
www.uscis.gov/forms/h-and-l-filing-fees-form-i-129petition-nonimmigrant-worker (last updated/
reviewed Feb. 2, 2018).
122 See H–2A Temporary Agricultural Workers,
https://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/
temporary-workers/h-2a-temporary-agriculturalworkers (last reviewed/updated March 8, 2018).
123 See H–2B Temporary Non-Agricultural
Workers, https://www.uscis.gov/working-unitedstates/temporary-workers/h-2b-temporary-nonagricultural-workers (last reviewed/updated June
11, 2018). H–2B petitioners who file with USCIS are
required to pay a $150 Fraud Detection and
Prevention fee per petition regardless of the number
of beneficiaries to which the petition pertains. DHS
does not propose any change to this statutory fee
because it lacks the authority to do so by
rulemaking. See INA secs. 214(c)(12)–(13), 286(v);
8 U.S.C. 1184(c)(12)–(13) 1356(v). This statutory fee
is in addition to the current Form I–129 fee of $460
and optional premium processing fee of $1,410.

PO 00000

Frm 00030

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

$705.
$705.
$560.
$860 (named); $425 (unnamed).
$725 (named); $395 (unnamed).
$815.
$705.
$715.

equitable and effective.124 OIG
identified a number of issues and
provided recommendations to address
the issues. The creation of the two new
forms, Forms I–129H2A and I–129H2B,
is USCIS’ response to OIG’s
recommendations. Further, USCIS
proposes the following changes:
• Separate fees for petitions with
named workers and petitions with
unnamed workers;
• Limit the number of named workers
that may be on a single petition to 25.
DHS proposes separate H–2A and H–
2B fees for petitions with named
workers and unnamed workers.
Currently, petitions for H–2A or H–2B
workers may include named or
unnamed workers. Petitioners must
name workers when (1) the petition is
filed for a worker who is a national of
a country not designated by the
Secretary of Homeland Security as
eligible to participate in the H–2A or H–
2B program; or (2) the beneficiary is in
the United States. See 8 CFR
214.2(h)(2)(iii). In addition, USCIS may
require the petitioner to name H–2B
workers where the name is needed to
establish eligibility for H–2B
nonimmigrant status. USCIS estimates
that it requires less time and resources
to adjudicate a petition with unnamed
workers than one with named workers.
USCIS runs background checks on
named workers, but cannot do so for
unnamed workers. After the petition is
approved, the petitioner finds workers
and the worker applies for a
nonimmigrant visa with DOS, who will
then vet the worker. Therefore, USCIS
believes that it takes less time for a
124 DHS OIG, H–2 Petition Fee Structure Is
Inequitable and Contributes to Processing Errors
(Mar. 6, 2017), available at https://
www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2017/
OIG-17-42-Mar17.pdf.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
USCIS immigration services officer to
adjudicate a petition with unnamed
workers. The proposed fees reflect the
average adjudication time estimated by
USCIS.
USCIS proposes to implement a limit
of 25 named beneficiaries per petition.
Proposed 8 CFR 214.2(h)(2)(ii),
(h)(5)(i)(B). Currently, there is no limit
on the number of named or unnamed
workers that may be on a single petition.
USCIS currently charges a flat fee
regardless of whether a petition
includes one or hundreds of named
temporary nonimmigrant workers.
However, because USCIS completes a
background check for each named
beneficiary, petitions with more named
beneficiaries require more time and
resources to adjudicate than petitions
with fewer named beneficiaries. This
means the cost to adjudicate a petition
increases with each additional named
beneficiary. In one case, a petitioner
included more than 600 named workers
in one petition.125 OIG observed that the
flat fee structure (meaning the same fee
regardless of the number of
nonimmigrants included in the petition)
disproportionally costs more per
nonimmigrant for petitions with few
beneficiaries compared to those with
large numbers of beneficiaries. In other
words, petitioners filing petitions with
low named beneficiary counts subsidize
the cost of petitioners filing petitions
with high named beneficiary counts.
OIG’s interviews of USCIS
immigration services officers indicated
that usually a maximum of 10 petitions
could be processed within a normal
workday.126 USCIS immigration
services officers could generally
adjudicate a petition with 1–25 named
workers in 2 hours. DHS estimates the
proposed change will increase H–2A
and H–2B petition filing volume by
approximately 2,000 based on the
number of H–2A and H–2B petitions
that were received in FY 2017 with 26
or more named beneficiaries. DHS
assumed that the total number of named
beneficiaries requested by an employer
would remain the same, so that an
employer petitioning for more than 25
named beneficiaries would file multiple
petitions.
The proposed fees would address the
inequities in the current fee structure
identified by the OIG audit. The
proposed limit of 25 named
beneficiaries per petition may make it
easier for USCIS immigration services
officers to promptly adjudicate a
petition. For example, the proposed
$425 fee for an H–2A petition without
125 Id.
126 Id.

at 13.
at 17.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

named workers is approximately 51
percent less than the proposed $860 fee
for an H–2A petition with named
workers because the adjudication
requires less time. Due to the decreased
complexity of the adjudication, the
proposed $425 fee for a petition without
named workers is $35 or 8 percent less
than the current $460 fee for the Form
I–129. The proposed $860 fee for a
petition with named workers is $400 or
87 percent more than the current $460
fee for the Form I–129.
3. Form I–129L, Petition for
Nonimmigrant Worker: L Classification
DHS proposes to create Form I–129L,
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: L
Classification, with a proposed fee of
$815. See proposed 8 CFR
106.2(a)(3)(iv). Under current
requirements, petitioners sponsoring L
nonimmigrant workers, who are
intracompany transferees,127 may be
required to submit additional statutory
fees or other additional forms to USCIS.
For example, two statutory fees may
apply for L nonimmigrant workers.128
Some petitions require the additional
Form I–129S, Nonimmigrant Petition
Based on Blanket L Petition.
The proposed Form I–129L would
collect the information required for
these petitions. Although the current L
Classification Supplement to Form I–
129 only separates out L–1A manager or
executive from L–1B specialized
knowledge, the proposed form would
further separate out L–1A managers
from L–1A executives on the form.
However, DHS is not proposing
different fees for managers and
executives, because the agency has no
records on the difference in completion
127 The L–1 intracompany transferee
nonimmigrant classification permits a multinational
organization to transfer certain employees from one
of its affiliated foreign entities to one of its entities
in the United States. The L–1A classification is for
employees coming to the United States temporarily
to perform services in a managerial or executive
capacity. The L–1B classification is for employees
coming to the United States temporarily to perform
services that require specialized knowledge. See
INA sec. 101(a)(15)(L), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(L).
128 Certain L petitioners may have to pay up to
$5,000 in statutory fees. DHS does not have the
authority to adjust the amount of these statutory
fees. USCIS does not keep most of the revenue
derived from these fees. CBP receives 50 percent of
the $4,500 9–11 Response and Biometric Entry-Exit
fee revenue and the remaining 50 percent is
deposited into the General Fund of the Treasury.
USCIS retains one third of the $500 Fraud Detection
and Prevention fee revenue, while the remainder is
split between the Department of State and the
Department of Labor. These statutory fees are in
addition to the current Form I–129 fee of $460 and
optional premium processing fee of $1,410. See
USCIS, H and L Filing Fees for Form I–129, Petition
for a Nonimmigrant Worker, https://www.uscis.gov/
forms/h-and-l-filing-fees-form-i-129-petitionnonimmigrant-worker (last updated/reviewed Feb.
2, 2018).

PO 00000

Frm 00031

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62309

rates or costs for processing petitions for
managers and executives. USCIS
currently captures completion rates for
H–1B, L, and other types of petitions,
but not for subgroups, such as managers
and executives, within classifications.
The proposed fee is based on the
completion rate for the average of L–1
petitions. As mentioned in section V.I.
Separating Form I–129, Petition for a
Nonimmigrant Worker, into Different
Forms, the proposed fees also assign the
direct costs of ASVVP site visits,
currently used for certain H–1B, L, and
all religious workers, to the specific
form for the classification.
4. Form I–129O, Petition for
Nonimmigrant Worker: O Classification
DHS proposes to create Form I–129O,
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: O
Classification, with a proposed fee of
$715. See proposed 8 CFR
106.2(a)(3)(vi). The separate form would
allow USCIS to tailor instructions and
data collection requirements for these
petitions for persons with extraordinary
ability in the sciences, arts, education,
business, or athletics, persons with
extraordinary achievement in the
motion picture or television industry,
and qualifying essential support
personnel. See INA secs. 101(a)(15)(O),
214(c); 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(O), 1184(c);
8 CFR 214.2(o). Similar to some other
proposed changes to Form I–129, DHS
proposes to limit each Form I–129O
petition to 25 named beneficiaries.129
Proposed 8 CFR 214.2(o)(2)(iv)(F). As
previously discussed in the H–2A and
H–2B section above, limiting the
number of named beneficiaries
simplifies and optimizes the
adjudication of these petitions, which
can lead to reduced average processing
times for a petition. Because USCIS
completes a background check for each
named beneficiary, petitions with more
named beneficiaries require more time
and resources to adjudicate than
petitions with fewer named
beneficiaries. This means the cost to
adjudicate a petition increases with
each additional named beneficiary.
Thus, limiting the number of named
beneficiaries may ameliorate the
inequity of petitioners filing petitions
with low beneficiary counts who
effectively subsidize the cost of
petitioners filing petitions with high
beneficiary counts. USCIS currently
captures adjudication hours for these
types of petitions. As stated in section
129 While O–1 petitions are limited to a single
named beneficiary, a petition for O–2 nonimmigrant
workers may include multiple named beneficiaries
in certain instances. See 8 CFR 214.2(o)(2)(iii)(F).

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62310

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

IV.B.2. Completion Rates, the proposed
fee is partly based on this data.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

5. Form I–129E&TN, Application for
Nonimmigrant Worker: E and TN
Classification
DHS proposes to create a separate
Form I–129 supplement for E and TN
applicants entitled Form I–129E&TN,
Application for Nonimmigrant Worker:
E and TN Classification. The Treaty
Trader (E–1) and Treaty Investor (E–2)
classifications are for citizens of
countries with which the United States
maintains treaties of commerce and
navigation. The applicant must be
coming to the United States to engage in
substantial trade principally between
the United States and the treaty country
(E–1), to develop and direct the
operations of an enterprise in which the
applicant has invested or is in the
process of investing a substantial
amount of capital (E–2), or to work in
the enterprise as an executive,
supervisor, or essentially skilled
employee. See INA sec. 101(a)(15)(E), 8
U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(E); 8 CFR 214.2(e).
An E–2 CNMI or E–2C investor is a
noncitizen who seeks to enter or remain
in the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands (CNMI) in order to
maintain an investment in the CNMI
that was approved by the CNMI
government before November 28, 2009.
This classification allows an eligible
noncitizen to be lawfully present in the
CNMI in order to maintain the
investment during the transition period
from CNMI to federal immigration law,
which was extended by Public Law
115–218, sec. 3(a) on July 24, 2018 and
will expire on December 31, 2029. See
48 U.S.C. 1806; proposed 8 CFR
214.2(e)(23). The E–3 classification
applies to nationals of Australia who are
coming to the United States solely to
perform services in a specialty
occupation requiring theoretical and
practical application of a body of highly
specialized knowledge and at least the
attainment of a bachelor’s degree, or its
equivalent, as a minimum for entry into
the occupation in the United States. See
INA secs. 101(a)(15)(E) and 214(i)(1); 8
U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(E) and 1184(i)(1). The
TN Classification was created to
implement part of a trilateral North
American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA) between Canada, Mexico, and
the United States. In accordance with
the NAFTA, a citizen of Canada or
Mexico who seeks temporary entry as a
business person to engage in business
activities at a professional level may be
admitted to the United States. See INA
sec. 214(e), 8 U.S.C. 1184(e); 8 CFR
214.6; proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(3)(viii).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

6. Form I–129MISC, Petition for
Nonimmigrant Worker: H–3, P, Q, or R
Classification
DHS proposes to create a new form for
the remaining non-immigrant worker
classifications, called Form I–129MISC,
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H–3,
P, Q, or R Classification. The costs used
to determine the proposed fee for this
form aggregate all identifiable costs
associated with the adjudication of
these different visa classifications,
including the costs of administering site
visits for R visa workers under the
Administrative Site Visit and
Verification Program. As previously
discussed in sections 2 and 4, DHS
proposes for classifications that allow
one petition to be filed for multiple
beneficiaries, to limit such petitions to
25 named beneficiaries. Proposed 8 CFR
214.2(p)(2)(iv)(F). As stated previously,
this change, as with all new I–129 form
types, is expected to simplify and
optimize the adjudication of these
petitions, which is expected to lead to
reduced processing times and reduced
completion rates. Because USCIS
completes a background check for each
named beneficiary, petitions with more
beneficiaries require more time and
resources to adjudicate than petitions
with fewer named beneficiaries. This
means the cost to adjudicate a petition
increases with each additional named
beneficiary. Thus, limiting the number
of named beneficiaries may ameliorate
the inequity of petitioners filing
petitions with low beneficiary counts
who effectively subsidize the cost of
petitioners filing petitions with high
beneficiary counts. USCIS does not have
separate completion rates for the
proposed Forms I–129E&TN and I–
129MISC. Currently, USCIS adjudicators
report hours on these classifications in
a catch-all Form I–129 category.
Creation of new separate forms may
allow USCIS to track each separately
and calculate specific fees for each
petition or application in the future,
which could serve as a basis for further
refinement of the fee for the various
nonimmigrant classifications in future
fee rules. The proposed fee for both
Forms I–129E&TN and I–129MISC is
$705. See proposed 8 CFR
106.2(a)(3)(viii).
7. Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands (CNMI) Fees
Two recent public laws affected
statutory fees for the Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI).
The Northern Mariana Islands Economic
Expansion Act, Public Law 115–53, sec.
2, 131 Stat. 1091, 1091 (2017) (2017
CNMI Act) increased the CNMI

PO 00000

Frm 00032

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

education funding fee from $150 to
$200. See 48 U.S.C. 1806(a)(6)(A)(i).
USCIS began accepting this increased
fee on August 23, 2017.130 DHS
proposes to make conforming edits to
the fee for the Petition for a CNMI-Only
Nonimmigrant Transitional Worker,
Form I–129CW, because of this statutory
change. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(J);
proposed 8 CFR 106.2(c)(7). Employers
must pay the fee for every beneficiary
that they seek to employ as a CNMI-only
transitional worker. The fee must be
paid at the time of filing the petition. By
statute, since it is for each worker
approved, USCIS refunds the CNMI
education funding fee if the petition is
not approved. The fee is a recurring fee
that petitioners must pay every year. A
prospective employer requesting
issuance of a permit with a validity
period longer than one year must pay
the fee for each year of requested
validity. USCIS transfers the revenue
from the CNMI education funding fee to
the treasury of the Commonwealth
Government to use for vocational
education, apprenticeships, or other
training programs for United States
workers. The Northern Mariana Islands
U.S. Workforce Act of 2018, Public Law
115–218, sec. 3, 132 Stat. 1547 (2018)
(2018 CNMI Act), granted DHS the
authority to adjust the fee for inflation.
See 48 U.S.C. 1806(a)(6)(A)(ii).
Beginning in FY 2020, DHS may adjust
the $200 CNMI education funding fee
once per year by notice in the Federal
Register.131 The adjustment must be
based on the annual change in the
Consumer Price Index for All Urban
Consumers (CPI–U) published by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics. See proposed
8 CFR 106.2(c)(7)(iii).
In addition to authorizing inflation
adjustments for the CNMI education
funding fee, the 2018 CNMI Act created
a new $50 CNMI fraud prevention and
detection fee. 2018 CNMI Act, sec. 3
(amending 48 U.S.C. 1806(a)(6)(A)(iv)).
The new $50 fraud prevention and
detection fee is in addition to other fees
that employers must pay for petitions to
employ CNMI-only transitional workers.
See proposed 8 CFR 106.2(c)(6). USCIS
began accepting the fee on July 25,
130 USCIS, New Legislation Increases Availability
of Visas for CNMI Workers for Fiscal Year 2017,
https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/newlegislation-increases-availability-visas-cnmiworkers-fiscal-year-2017 (last reviewed/updated on
Aug. 28, 2017).
131 Beginning in fiscal year 2020, the Secretary of
Homeland Security, through notice in the Federal
Register, may annually adjust the supplemental fee
imposed under clause (i) by a percentage equal to
the annual change in the Consumer Price Index for
All Urban Consumers published by the Bureau of
Labor Statistics. 48 U.S.C. 1806(a)(6)(A)(ii).

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
2018.132 The new fee is only due at the
time of filing. It is a single $50 fee per
petition, not a fee charged per
beneficiary like the CNMI education
funding fee. USCIS must use the
revenue for preventing immigration
benefit fraud in the CNMI, in
accordance with INA section
286(v)(2)(B), 8 U.S.C. 1356(v)(2)(B). See
also 48 U.S.C. 1806(a)(6)(A)(iv), as
amended by 2018 CNMI Act, sec. 3.
DHS also proposes conforming edits
to CNMI regulations regarding fee
waivers and biometric services.
Currently, some CNMI applicants and
beneficiaries may qualify for a fee
waiver based on inability to pay or other
reasons. See 8 CFR 214.2(e)(23)(xv),
(w)(5), and (w)(14)(iii). Generally, fee
waivers are not available for
employment-based applications and
petitions. However, when DHS
established the CW–1 petition fees, it
decided to treat the CNMI with more
flexibility in this regard. See 76 FR
55513–4. As discussed in section V.C.,
Fee Waivers, DHS proposes to limit fee
waivers to immigration benefit requests
for which USCIS is required by law to
consider a fee waiver. DHS proposes in
this rule to treat CW–1 petitions like
other employment-based petitions. See
proposed 8 CFR 106.3. The proposed
change would eliminate fee waiver
eligibility for CNMI applicants and
beneficiaries. See proposed 8 CFR
214.2(e)(23)(xv), (w)(5) and (w)(14)(iii).
Currently, in addition to the petition fee
paid by their employer, CNMI
beneficiaries may pay an additional
biometric services fee when seeking a
grant or extension of CW–1 status in the
CNMI. See 76 FR 55513–4; 8 CFR
214.2(e)(23)(viii) and (w)(15). As
explained in section V. E., Changes to
Biometric Services Fee, DHS proposes
to incorporate the cost of biometric
services into the underlying
immigration benefit request fees. This
proposed change would place the entire
financial burden for CNMI petition fees
on the employer, eliminating any fees
paid by the employee. See proposed 8
CFR 106.2, 214.2(v)(23)(viii) and
(w)(15). However, employees and their
families filing Form I–539 to request a
grant or extension of derivative CW–2
nonimmigrant status for a spouse or
child of a CW–1 nonimmigrant would
still be responsible for that filing fee. A
fee waiver would no longer be available.
132 USCIS, New Law Extends CNMI CW–1
Program, Mandates New Fraud Fee, and Will
Require E-Verify Participation, https://
www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/new-law-extends-cnmicw-1-program-mandates-new-fraud-fee-and-willrequire-e-verify-participation (last reviewed/
updated on July 25, 2018).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

DHS does not propose to limit the
number of named beneficiaries included
in a single I–129CW filing.
J. Premium Processing
1. Change Premium Processing Fee by
Guidance
The INA permits certain employmentbased immigration benefit applicants
and petitioners to request, for an
additional fee, premium processing. See
Public Law 106–553, App. B, tit. I, sec.
112, 114 Stat. 2762, 2762A–68 (Dec. 21,
2000); INA sec. 286(u), 8 U.S.C. 1356(u).
Congress set the premium processing fee
and authorized USCIS to adjust the fee
for inflation, as determined by the
Consumer Price Index (CPI). Id. DHS
recently increased the premium
processing fee for inflation. See 83 FR
44449; 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(SS);
proposed 8 CFR 106.4. The current fee
is $1,410.133 USCIS currently offers
premium processing to employmentbased petitions including Form I–129,
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker, and
Form I–140, Immigrant Petition for
Alien Worker, in certain visa
classifications. Currently, petitioners
and applicants use Form I–907, Request
for Premium Processing Service, and
pay the $1,410 fee to request 15-day
processing. DHS is not proposing a
change to premium processing fees at
this time.
DHS proposes to amend its
regulations so that it can notify the
public of future premium processing fee
inflationary increases through changes
to Form I–907 instructions (following
the requirements of 5 CFR part 1320)
and the USCIS website, http://
www.uscis.gov. See proposed 8 CFR
106.2(a)(43), 106.4(c) and 106.4(e)(ii).
By law, DHS may adjust the premium
processing fee for inflation according to
CPI; therefore, the amount of the fee
increase is straightforward and need not
be codified. USCIS requires the
flexibility to change the fee amount
without undue delay when it needs
additional premium processing fee
revenue to provide premium processing
services and to make infrastructure
improvements in the adjudications and
applicant- or petitioner-service
processes as authorized by INA sec.
286(u), 8 U.S.C. 1356(u).
133 Premium processing fees are paid in addition
to the regular form fee. See INA sec. 286(u), 8 U.S.C.
1356(u); 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(SS)(1); proposed 8
CFR 103.4. For example, individuals would pay the
proposed $545 fee for a Form I–140 under this rule,
plus $1,410 for premium processing. Premium
processing prioritizes the applicable application or
petition for adjudication. The additional fee permits
USCIS to devote specific resources to the processing
of that immigration benefit request and to make
infrastructure improvements in the adjudications
and customer-service processes.

PO 00000

Frm 00033

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62311

2. Change Calendar Days to Business
Days
DHS proposes to change the
limitation for 15-day processing
currently codified at 8 CFR 103.7(e)
from calendar days to business days.
Proposed 8 CFR 106.4(d). For purposes
of calculating the 15-day premium
processing clock, business days are
those days on which the Federal
Government is open for business and
does not include weekends, federally
observed holidays, or the days on which
Federal Government offices are closed,
such as for weather-related or other
reasons. The closure may be nationwide
or in the region where the adjudication
of the benefit for which premium
processing is sought will take place. The
former INS established the 15-day
period in June 2001. See Establishing
Premium Processing Service for
Employment-Based Petitions and
Applications, 66 FR 29682 (June 1,
2001). The June 1, 2001 rule cited the
District of Columbia Appropriations Act
of 2001, Public Law 106–553, as
specifying that the INS was required to
process applications under the Premium
Processing Service in 15 calendar days.
66 FR 29682. DHS has determined that
the June 1, 2001 interim rule was
incorrect, and that the District of
Columbia Appropriations Act, 2001 did
not include a requirement that the
Service process applications under the
Premium Processing Service in 15
calendar days. Therefore, DHS is free to
interpret its authority under INA section
286(u), 8 U.S.C. 1356(u), to establish a
new processing timeframe as 15
business days rather than 15 calendar
days. In recent years, USCIS suspended
premium processing for certain
categories of employment-based
petitions to permit officers to process
long-pending non-premium filed
petitions and to prevent a lapse in
employment authorization for
beneficiaries of Form I–129 extension of
stay petitions. In certain instances,
USCIS has been unable to accomplish
the required 15-day response due to the
high volume of incoming petitions and
a significant surge in premium
processing requests.134 The proposed
change from 15 calendar days to 15
business days will provide USCIS
134 See ‘‘USCIS Will Temporarily Suspend
Premium Processing for All H–1B Petitions, https://
www.uscis.gov/archive/uscis-will-temporarilysuspend-premium-processing-all-h-1b-petitions
(last reviewed/updated March 3, 2017); USCIS Will
Temporarily Suspend Premium Processing for
Fiscal Year 2019 H–1B Cap Petitions, https://
www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-will-temporarilysuspend-premium-processing-fiscal-year-2019-h-1bcap-petitions (last reviewed/updated March 20,
2018).

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62312

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

additional time to complete the
necessary processing on a premium
processing petition and issue a decision.
The additional time may also reduce the
need for USCIS to suspend premium
processing when request filing volumes
are high.
3. Actions That End or Restart The 15Day Period
DHS also proposes that USCIS would
refund the premium processing service
fee but continue to process the case if
it cannot take an adjudicative action on
the request, as evidenced by notification
of (but not necessarily receipt of) an
approval or denial notice by the end of
the 15th business day, beginning on the
date the properly filed premium
processing request was initially
accepted by USCIS or the premium
processing clock reset upon receipt of a
response to a request for evidence (RFE)
or notice of intent to deny (NOID).
Proposed 8 CFR 106.4(d). That proposal
represents no change, other than how
the 15 days is calculated, from the
current regulations governing USCIS
requests for premium processing. 8 CFR
103.7(e). However, DHS also proposes to
clarify its current premium processing
regulations as they relate to what
actions would terminate the 15-day
period or otherwise start a new 15-day
period. The current regulation is
potentially confusing because it
includes interim actions in the list of
adjudicative actions evidencing of a
‘‘final decision’’ for the purpose of
stopping the 15-day period. 8 CFR
103.7(e)(2)(i) (‘‘If USCIS cannot reach a
final decision on a request for which
premium processing was requested, as
evidenced by an approval notice, denial
notice, a notice of intent to deny, or a
request for evidence, USCIS will refund
the premium processing service fee, but
continue to process the case.’’). In this
rule, DHS proposes to clarify the two
circumstances in which it would refund
the premium processing fee:
1. Where USCIS does not take any
adjudicative action within 15 business
days from the date on which it accepts
a properly filed request for premium
processing, together with all required
fees, or
2. Where USCIS does not take
subsequent adjudicative action within
15 business days from the date on
which USCIS receives a response to an
RFE or a NOID.
DHS proposes that the 15-day period
will stop when USCIS takes certain
adjudicative actions, specifically the
notification of an approval, denial, RFE
or NOID. Proposed 8 CFR 106.4(d)(1).
DHS also proposes to clarify that when
USCIS issues an RFE or NOID on a

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

benefit request for which premium
processing service has been properly
requested, including the payment of all
required fees, a new 15 business day
period will begin upon the receipt by
USCIS of the benefit requestor’s RFE or
NOID response at the address that was
required by the notice or online.
Proposed 8 CFR 106.4(d)(2).
4. Expedited Processing for Other
Requests
Commenters regularly request that
DHS extend premium processing to
other immigration benefit requests. See,
e.g., 75 FR 58978 and 81 FR 73309. The
FY 2019/2020 fee review did not
analyze the potential effect of premium
processing for other forms. Congress
established the premium processing
service for ‘‘employment-based petitions
and applications.’’ INA sec. 286(u), 8
U.S.C. 1356(u). Congress established the
premium processing fee at an amount it
determined to be appropriate, and it
permitted USCIS to increase the fee
based on inflation. See 81 FR 73309.
These fees cover the estimated costs of
providing premium processing for the
associated benefits. Nevertheless, it
would be difficult to estimate the staff,
resources, and costs necessary to ensure
the processing of additional benefit
types within a certain time frame,
especially when those cases may require
other types of background checks,
interviews, and additional steps that
USCIS does not generally control.
Expanding the premium processing
program would require USCIS to
estimate the costs of a service that does
not currently exist with sufficient
confidence that it can deliver the service
promised and not impair service in
other product lines. DHS would require
the devotion of considerable resources
to study a potential new premium
processing program. Thus, DHS
proposes no extension of premium
processing beyond its current usage.
However, comments are welcome on the
subject.
K. Regional Centers
DHS proposes no fee change for Form
I–924, Application for Regional Center
Designation under the Immigrant
Investor Program because the current fee
is adequate. See 8 CFR
103.7(b)(1)(i)(WW); proposed
106.2(a)(47).
L. Secure Mail Initiative
In 2016, an OIG audit recommended
that USCIS evaluate the costs and
benefits of using the U.S. Postal
Service’s hold for pickup as an
alternative secure method for delivering

PO 00000

Frm 00034

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

secure documents to applicants.135
USCIS has decided to implement
Signature Confirmation Restricted
Delivery (SCRD) as the sole method of
delivery of secure documents for
USCIS.136 Proposed 8 CFR
103.2(b)(19)(iii). USCIS began phasing
in use of the Signature Confirmation
Restricted Delivery service to re-mail
Permanent Resident Cards, Employment
Authorization Cards, and Travel
Booklets returned by USPS as nondeliverable beginning on April 30,
2018.137 USCIS analyzed the additional
costs associated with expanding this
service to all USCIS secured documents
and determined that the cost in FY 2019
would be $26.9 million, based on
anticipated mailing volumes and the per
unit mailing cost of the service. USCIS
planned for similar costs in FY 2020. As
detailed in the supporting
documentation, the ABC model
assigned this additional cost to the Issue
Document activity for immigration
benefit requests that may result in a
Permanent Resident Card, Employment
Authorization Card, or Travel Booklet.
Issue Document means producing and
distributing secure cards that identify
the holder as a foreign national and also
identifies his or her immigration status
and/or employment authorization.138 As
proposed, DHS, at its discretion, may
require the use of Signature
Confirmation Restricted Delivery for
additional documents beyond
Permanent Resident Cards, Employment
Authorization Cards, and Travel
Booklets (for example, certificates of
naturalization and citizenship, which
are currently being mailed to recipients)
in the future by updating the relevant
form instructions. Proposed 8 CFR
103.2(b)(19)(iii).
M. Intercountry Adoptions
1. Adjustment to Proposed Fees for
Certain Intercountry Adoption-Specific
Forms
DHS proposes to limit the increase of
adoption-related fees in this rule
135 DHS OIG, Better Safeguards are Needed in
USCIS Green Card Issuance (Nov. 16, 2016),
available at https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/
files/assets/2017/OIG-17-11-Nov16.pdf.
136 DHS OIG, Verification Review: Better
Safeguards are Needed in USCIS Green Card
Issuance (Apr. 10, 2018), available at https://
www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2018-04/
OIG-18-61-Apr18.pdf.
137 USCIS, USCIS to Begin Using More Secure
Mail Delivery Service, https://www.uscis.gov/news/
news-releases/uscis-begin-using-more-secure-maildelivery-service (last reviewed/updated April 27,
2018).
138 See the FY 2019/2020 Immigration
Examinations Fee Account Fee Review Supporting
Documentation included in the docket of this
NPRM for more information on fee review
activities.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
consistent with previous fee rules. See,
e.g., 81 FR 73298. DHS will continue its
policy of reducing fee burdens on
adoptive families by covering some of
the costs attributable to the adjudication
of certain adoption-related petitions and
applications (Forms I–600/600A/800/
800A) through the fees collected from
other immigration benefit requests. If
DHS used the estimated fee-paying unit
cost from the ABC model for Form I–
600, then this benefit request would
have a fee of at least $1,423.139 DHS
believes that it would be contrary to
public and humanitarian interests to
impose a fee of this amount on
prospective adoptive parents seeking to
adopt a child from another country.
Therefore, DHS proposes to apply the 5
percent weighted average increase to the
current fee of $775, representing a $35
increase to $810 for Forms I–600/600A/
800/800A. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(b)(21),
(22), (23), (33), (34), (35).

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

2. Clarification of Fee Exception for
Birth Siblings
DHS proposes amendments to 8 CFR
106.2, 204.3, and 204.313 to clarify the
regulations and align them with current
practice regarding when prospective
adoptive parents are not required to pay
the Form I–600 or Form I–800 filing fee
for multiple Form I–600 or Form I–800
petitions. Currently, prospective
adoptive parents with a valid Form I–
600A or Form I–800A approval to adopt
more than one child are not required to
pay a fee for the first Form I–600 or
Form I–800 petition. They are required
to pay the Form I–600 or Form I–800
filing fee for additional Form I–600 or
Form I–800 petitions, unless the
beneficiaries are birth siblings. If the
beneficiaries are not birth siblings, the
Form I–600 or Form I–800 fee is
required for each petition after the first.
To align with current and historical
practice, DHS proposes to clarify in the
regulations that this exception is limited
to ‘‘birth’’ siblings. This approach is
consistent with the special treatment
afforded in the INA to ‘‘natural
siblings,’’ which allows a Form I–600 or
Form I–800 petition to be filed for a
child up to age 18, rather than age 16,
only if the beneficiary is the ‘‘natural
sibling’’ of another foreign born child
who has immigrated (or will immigrate)
based on adoption by the same adoptive
parents. INA 101(b)(1)(F)(ii) and (G)(iii);
8 U.S.C. 1101(b)(1)(F)(ii) and (G)(iii).
While the INA uses the term ‘‘natural
sibling,’’ DHS generally uses the term
‘‘birth siblings’’ synonymously, which
139 Model

output from supporting documentation
in the docket, page 22.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

includes half-siblings but does not
include adoptive siblings.
3. Suitability and Eligibility Approval
Validity Period
DHS proposes amendments to 8 CFR
204.3 relating to orphan cases under
INA section 101(b)(1)(F), 8 U.S.C.
1101(b)(1)(F) (non-Convention cases).
The proposed revisions to the orphan
regulations are necessary to eliminate
disparity between the 18-month
approval period for the Form I–600A,
Application for Advance Processing of
an Orphan Petition, the 15-month
validity period of FBI fingerprint
clearances, and the 15-month approval
period for a Form I–800A, Application
for Determination of Suitability to
Adopt a Child from a Convention
Country and any approved extension.
Under current regulation, the
approval of a Form I–600A in an orphan
case is valid for 18 months. See 8 CFR
204.3(h)(3)(i). However, standard USCIS
policy has been that the FBI’s clearance
of a person’s fingerprints is valid for 15
months, thereby creating inconsistency
and a gap period with the 18-month
approval validity period for the Form I–
600A. This inconsistency was partially
resolved with the ratification of the
Hague Convention on Protection of
Children and Co-operation in Respect of
Intercountry Adoption (Hague Adoption
Convention) and subsequent
codification of 8 CFR 204.312(e)(1),
whereby the initial approval period for
a Form I–800A in a Convention case is
15 months from the date USCIS received
the initial FBI response for the
fingerprints of the prospective adoptive
parent(s) and any adult members of the
household. This 15-month period also
applies to the extension of the Form I–
800A approval period for an additional
15 months from the date USCIS receives
the new FBI response on the
fingerprints. Creating parity in the
approval periods for suitability and
eligibility determinations provides
additional protections for adopted
children and provides consistency and
alignment of the orphan and Hague
regulations. Having a standardized 15month validity period will also alleviate
the burden on prospective adoptive
parents and adoption service providers
to manage and monitor multiple
expiration dates. Therefore, DHS
proposes to alter the validity period for
a Form I–600A approval in an orphan
case to 15 months. Proposed 8 CFR
204.3(b), (d), (h)(3)(i),140 (h)(7), &
(h)(13).
140 In addition to changing the 18-month period
to 15 months, DHS is removing the internal
procedure from 8 CFR 204.3(h)(3)(i) that provides

PO 00000

Frm 00035

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62313

4. Form I–600A/I–600, Supplement 3,
Request for Action on Approved Form
I–600A/I–600
DHS proposes to create a new form to
further align the processes for adoptions
from countries that are party to the
Hague Adoption Convention, with the
process for adoptions from countries
that are not party to that Convention.
The proposed form name is Form I–
600A/I–600, Supplement 3, Request for
Action on Approved Form I–600A/I–
600. The proposed fee is $405. Proposed
8 CFR 106.2(b)(23). As discussed in the
Paperwork Reduction Act section of this
preamble, the draft Supplement 3 is
posted in the docket of this rulemaking
for the public to review and provide
comments.
Currently, U.S. citizen applicants and
petitioners (prospective adoptive
parents) face somewhat different
processes depending on whether the
child or children that they wish to adopt
is from a Hague Adoption Convention
country or a non-Hague Adoption
Convention country. USCIS uses Forms
I–800, I–800A, and I–800A Supplement
3 for Hague Adoption Convention
countries. USCIS uses Forms I–600 and
I–600A for non-Hague Adoption
Convention countries. A fee for Form I–
600A/I–600 Supplement 3 would
further align the Form I–600A/I–600
post-approval request process with the
existing Form I–800A process in four
key areas:
1. Suitability & Eligibility Extensions;
2. New Approval Notices;
3. Change of Country; and
4. Duplicate Approval Notices.
USCIS adjudicators must re-assess
whether prospective adoptive parents
are still suitable and eligible to adopt if
the prospective adoptive parents’
circumstances have changed after the
initial USCIS suitability determination.
The proposed fee would help recover
some of the cost for this work.
Table 12 and the following sections
summarize the current process and the
proposed changes.
where documents will be forwarded and
notification of overseas offices of the approval, and
is correcting a reference to the number of children
the prospective adoptive parents are approved for
in the home study to refer to the number of children
the prospective adoptive parents are approved for
in the Form I–600A approval. DHS is also adding
a reference to proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(23) in
section 204.3(h)(3)(i), relating to Form I–600A
extension requests. Additionally, DHS is replacing
the reference to an outbreak of Severe Acute
Respiratory Syndrome in section 204.3(h)(3)(ii)
with a more general reference to public health or
other emergencies. This revision will provide the
agency with the flexibility to extend Form I–600A
validity periods when it determines that an
emergency situation, other than a SARS outbreak,
prevents petitioners from timely filing a Form I–600
petition before expiration of their Form I–600A
approval.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62314

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 12—SUMMARY OF CURRENT AND PROPOSED ADOPTION PROCESSES RELATED TO PROPOSED FORM I–600A/I–600
SUPPLEMENT 3
Type of change

Current process

Proposed process

Suitability & Eligibility Extensions.

The Form I–600A approval notice reflects a validity period for the prospective adoptive parents’ suitability
and eligibility determination. Currently, U.S. citizen
applicants (prospective adoptive parents) may request one initial extension of their Form I–600A approval without fee by submitting a request in writing.
Prospective adoptive parents are not able to request
a second or subsequent extension of their Form I–
600A approval.
Currently, prospective adoptive parents can request a
new approval notice based on a significant change
and updated home study with no fee. New approvals
require adjudicators to re-assess whether prospective
adoptive parents remain suitable and eligible to adopt
after the significant change in circumstances. (For
example, significant decreases in finances, change of
residence, other changes in the household, etc.) Prospective adoptive parents must pay the fee for Form
I–600A or I–600 if it is a second or subsequent request unless they are also requesting their first (no
fee) extension or first (no fee) change of country.
Currently, prospective adoptive parents may change
their proposed country of adoption once without fee.
For example, if they are matched with an eligible orphan in a country other than the country initially identified on their Form I–600A. For subsequent country
changes, prospective adoptive parents file Form I–
824, Application for Action on an Approved Application or Petition, with fee.

DHS proposes to require prospective adoptive parents
to submit Form I–600A/I–600, Supplement 3 to request the initial no-fee extension. Form I–600A/I–600
Supplement 3 would allow prospective adoptive parents to request second or subsequent extensions
with the proposed fee.

Home Study Updates ...........

Change of Country ...............

DHS proposes to require prospective adoptive parents
to submit Form I–600A/I–600, Supplement 3 to request a new approval notice. The prospective adoptive parent must pay the fee unless they are also filing a first time request for either an extension or
change of country. Second or subsequent requests
would require the proposed fee.

DHS proposes to require prospective adoptive parents
to submit Form I–600A/I–600, Supplement 3 to request the initial no-fee change of proposed country of
adoption.* 141 Form I–600A/I–600 Supplement 3
would allow prospective adoptive parents to request
a second or subsequent change in the proposed
country of adoption with the proposed fee.

* See d. below for limitations in Hague Adoption Convention transition cases and countries.

a. Suitability & Eligibility Extensions
Currently, U.S. citizen prospective
adoptive parents for non-Hague
Adoption Convention countries may
request no-fee initial extension of their
Form I–600A approval.142 Requests are
submitted in writing and second or
subsequent requests to extend their
approval are not allowed. See 8 CFR
103.7(b)(1)(i)(Z)(3). DHS proposes that
prospective adoptive parents be allowed
to request more than one extension of
their Form I–600A approval, if
necessary, by filing the proposed Form
I–600A/I–600 Supplement 3. The first
request would be free under this
proposal. Second or subsequent requests
would require the proposed fee of $405.
See proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(23).

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

b. New Approval Notices
Currently, prospective adoptive
parents using the non-Hague Adoption
Convention process may request a new
approval notice based on a significant
change in circumstances and an
141 See section V.M.4.d. for limitations in Hague
Adoption Convention transition cases and
countries.
142 The Form I–600A approval notice reflects the
validity period of the prospective adoptive parents’
suitability and eligibility determination.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

updated home study at no cost. See 8
CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(Z). DHS proposes that
prospective adoptive parents must file
the proposed Form I–600A/I–600
Supplement 3 to notify USCIS of a
significant change and request a new
approval notice. See proposed 8 CFR
106.2(a)(23). The prospective adoptive
parent must pay the proposed fee of
$405 unless they are also filing either a
first time request for an extension or
change of country on the same
Supplement 3.
c. Change of Country
Currently, prospective adoptive
parents may change the proposed
country of adoption once without fee
and may make subsequent country
changes by filing Form I–824,
Application for Action on an Approved
Application or Petition, with fee. See 8
CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(OO). DHS proposes
that prospective adoptive parents be
allowed to change the proposed country
of adoption by filing the proposed Form
I–600A/I–600 Supplement 3. The first
request to change countries would
remain without fee under this proposal.
Second or subsequent requests would
require the proposed fee of $405. Id.

PO 00000

Frm 00036

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

d. Hague Adoption Convention
Transition Cases
DHS proposes to clarify the processes
for requesting an extension of the Form
I–600A approval and other actions on
an approved Form I–600A or I–600 as
they pertain to adoptions from countries
that newly become a party to the Hague
Adoption Convention. When the Hague
Adoption Convention enters into force
for a country, cases that meet certain
criteria are generally permitted by the
new Convention country to proceed as
‘‘transition cases’’ under the non-Hague
Adoption Convention process (Form I–
600A and Form I–600 process).
Provided that the new Convention
country agrees with the transition
criteria, USCIS will generally consider a
case to be a transition case if, before the
date the Convention entered into force
for the country, the prospective
adoptive parent(s): (1) Filed a Form I–
600A that designated the transition
country as the intended country of
adoption or did not designate a specific
country; (2) filed a Form I–600 on behalf
of a beneficiary from the transition
country; or (3) completed the adoption
of a child from the transition country. If
the case does not qualify as a transition
case, the prospective adoptive parents
will generally need to follow the Hague

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Adoption Convention process with the
filing of Form I–800A and Form I–800.
With the addition of the new Form I–
600A/I–600 Supplement 3, DHS
proposes to codify certain limitations on
when the Supplement 3 can be used in
the context of transition cases.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

i. Suitability and Eligibility Extensions
If a case qualifies as a transition case
based on the filing of Form I–600A
before the entry into force date, in order
to continue as a transition case the
prospective adoptive parents must file
the Form I–600 petition while the Form
I–600A approval remains valid.
Currently, prospective adoptive parents
are permitted to request a one-time, nofee extension of their Form I–600A
approval in order to remain a transition
case. As discussed in section a.) above,
DHS proposes that prospective adoptive
parents may request more than one
extension of their Form I–600A
approval outside of the transition
context. DHS proposes that prospective
adoptive parents may only be permitted
to request a one-time extension of their
Form I–600A approval as a qualified
transition case. See proposed 8 CFR
106.2(a)(23). Generally, transition
countries have requested that DHS limit
the ability of transition cases to
continue indefinitely in order to limit
the confusion that having two
simultaneously running processes
causes to its administrative bodies and
judicial systems. This will provide
prospective adoptive parents who have
taken certain steps to begin the
intercountry adoption process with a
country before the Convention entered
into force additional time to complete
the adoption process under the nonHague process, but reasonably limits the
ability to indefinitely extend the
validity period of the Form I–600A
approval and the processing of
transition cases under the non-Hague
process.
ii. Change of Country
The transition criteria were generally
designed to permit prospective adoptive
parents who had taken certain steps to
begin the intercountry adoption process
with a country before the Convention
entered into force to be able to continue
under the non-Hague process, rather
than requiring them to begin under the
Hague process, which has different
processing requirements. If the
prospective adoptive parents designated
a country of intended adoption on their
Form I–600A or prior change of country
request other than the transition
country, they generally would not fall
into the category of families the
transition criteria were intended to

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

reach because the designation is an
indication they have begun the
intercountry adoption process with the
designated country and not with the
transition country. Therefore, in the
transition context, prospective adoptive
parents who designated a country on
their Form I–600A or prior change of
country request that is not the transition
country generally have not been
permitted to change their Form I–600A
approval to a transition country for
purposes of being considered a
transition case. DHS proposes to codify
this limitation in this rule. See proposed
8 CFR 106.2(a)(23).
iii. Requests To Increase the Number of
Children Approved To Adopt
Outside of the transition context,
prospective adoptive parents are
generally permitted to request an
updated Form I–600A approval notice
to increase the number of children they
are approved to adopt. In the transition
context, however, prospective adoptive
parents with transition cases generally
have not been permitted to request an
increase in the number of children they
are approved to adopt from a transition
country.143 However, unless prohibited
by the new Convention country, DHS
will permit prospective adoptive
parent(s) to request an updated Form I–
600A approval notice to increase the
number of children they are approved to
adopt as a transition case only in order
to pursue the adoption of a birth sibling,
provided the birth sibling(s) is (are)
identified and the Form I–600 petition
is filed before the Form I–600A approval
expires. See proposed 8 CFR
106.2(a)(23). This approach is consistent
with the special treatment afforded in
the INA to ‘‘natural siblings,’’ which
allows a Form I–600 or Form I–800
petition to be filed for a child up to age
18, rather than age 16, only if the
beneficiary is the ‘‘natural sibling’’ of
another foreign born child who has
immigrated (or will immigrate) based on
adoption by the same adoptive parents.
INA 101(b)(1)(F)(ii) and (G)(iii); 8 U.S.C.
1101(b)(1)(F)(ii) and (G)(iii). While the
INA uses the term ‘‘natural sibling,’’
DHS generally uses the term ‘‘birth
siblings’’ synonymously, which
includes half-siblings but does not
include adoptive siblings.
5. Form I–800A, Supplement 3, Request
for Action on Approved Form I–800A
DHS also proposes to provide a fee of
$405 at 8 CFR 106.2 and clarify 8 CFR
204.312 to align with the current
process for adjudicating Form I–800A
143 See https://www.uscis.gov/adoption/countryinformation/adoption-information-haiti.

PO 00000

Frm 00037

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62315

Supplement 3. Currently, prospective
adoptive parents may request a first
extension of the Form I–800A approval
and a first time change in the proposed
country of adoption, by filing Form I–
800A Supplement 3 without a fee.
Second or subsequent requests for an
extension or change of country can
currently be made by filing Form I–
800A Supplement 3 with a fee.
Additionally, prospective adoptive
parents can currently request a new
approval notice based on a significant
change and updated home study by
filing Form I–800A Supplement 3. A
request for a new approval notice must
be submitted with a fee, unless the
prospective adoptive parents are also
filing a first time request for either an
extension or change of country on the
same Supplement 3. When DHS
implemented the Hague Adoption
Convention, as a matter of operational
efficiency USCIS decided to accept
Form I–800A Supplement 3 extension
requests regardless of whether the Form
I–800 petition was already filed, rather
than requiring prospective adoptive
parents to file a new Form I–800A to
begin the process anew. That procedure
generally shortens the subsequent
suitability and eligibility adjudication
process for prospective adoptive parents
seeking an extension of their Form I–
800A approval, as Supplement 3
adjudications are generally prioritized
over new Form I–800A filings, allowing
for a new decision on the prospective
adoptive parents’ suitability and
eligibility to occur more quickly.
Therefore, DHS proposes to amend 8
CFR 204.312(e)(1)(i) to permit the filing
of Form I–800A Supplement 3
regardless of whether Form I–800 has
been filed.
N. Changes to Genealogy Search and
Records Requests
DHS proposes changes to the
genealogy search and request fees in the
FY 2019/2020 IEFA fee review. These
proposals will allow USCIS to send preexisting digital records as part of a
response to requestors who have filed
Form G–1041, Genealogy Index Search
Request, and may otherwise help USCIS
improve genealogy processes.
The USCIS genealogy program
processes requests for historical records
of deceased individuals. See
Establishment of a Genealogy Program,
73 FR 28026 (May 15, 2008) (final rule).
Before creating a genealogy program,
USCIS processed the requests as
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
request workload, which resulted in
delays. See Establishment of a
Genealogy Program, 71 FR 20357–8
(Apr. 20, 2006) (proposed rule).

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

62316

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Requestors use the USCIS website 144 or
Form G–1041, Genealogy Index Search
Request, to request an index search of
USCIS historical records. See 8 CFR
103.7(b)(1)(i)(E). USCIS informs the
requestor whether any records are
available by mailing a response letter.
Requestors use the Form G–1041A,
Genealogy Records Request, to obtain
copies of USCIS historical records, if
they exist. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(F).
In the FY 2016/2017 fee rule, USCIS
adopted the first change to the
genealogy search and records requests
fees since they had been established at
$65 fee for both search requests and
records requests. See 81 FR 73304. At
the time, genealogy fees were
insufficient to cover the full costs of the
genealogy program. USCIS increased the
fee to meet the estimated cost of the
program and permit USCIS to respond
to requests for such historical records
and materials.
After nearly ten years of operating the
genealogy program, DHS proposes to
make several changes to the process.
Ultimately, these changes are intended
to allow USCIS to provide genealogy
search results and historic records more
quickly when pre-existing digital
records exist.
First, DHS proposes to expand the use
of online genealogy requests. DHS
proposes to revise genealogy regulations
to encourage requestors to submit the
electronic versions of Form G–1041,
Genealogy Index Search Request, and
Form G–1041A, Genealogy Records
Request, through the online portal at
https://www.uscis.gov/genealogy. See
proposed 8 CFR 103.40(b). Electronic
versions of the requests reduce the
administrative burden on USCIS by
eliminating the need to manually enter
requestor data into its systems.
Requestors that cannot submit the forms
electronically may still submit paper
copies of both forms with the required
filing fees.
Second, DHS proposes to change the
search request process so that USCIS
may provide requestors with preexisting digital records, if they exist, in
response to a Form G–1041, Genealogy
Index Search Request. When requestors
submit Form G–1041, Genealogy Index
Search Request, on paper or
electronically, USCIS searches for
available records. If no record is found,
then USCIS notifies the requestor by
mail or email. If USCIS identifies
available records, then USCIS provides
details on the available records, but
does not provide the copies of the actual
records. Under current regulations, a
144 USCIS, Genealogy, https://www.uscis.gov/
genealogy.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

requestor must file Form G–1041A,
Genealogy Records Request, with a fee
for each file requested, before USCIS
provides any records that it found as a
result of the search request. DHS
proposes to provide the requestor with
those pre-existing digital records, if they
exist, in response to the initial search
request. See proposed 8 CFR 103.40(f).
DHS proposes in this rule to streamline
the process for Form G–1041, Records
Index Search and provide the preexisting digital records to either an
electronic reading room that can be
accessed with a unique pin number, by
mail with a CD, or paper copy and not
require Form G–1041A. If no records
exist, or if only paper copies of the
records exist, then the requestor must
follow the current process.
As a result of the proposed changes
for pre-existing digital records, USCIS
proposes to limit Form G–1041A,
Genealogy Records Request, to only
paper file requests. See proposed 8 CFR
103.40(g). Consistent with current
practices, requestors must still pay the
genealogy records request fee for a paper
record requested. USCIS believes the
change will increase efficiency and
decrease future wait times for
requestors.
Lastly, DHS proposes to change the
genealogy fees as a result of these
operational changes. See 8 CFR
103.7(b)(1)(i)(E) and (F); proposed 8 CFR
106.2(c)(1) and (2). The proposed fees
are based on results from the same ABC
model used to calculate other
immigration benefit request fees
proposed in this rule. The proposed fees
for Forms G–1041 and G–1041A are
$240 and $385 respectively. They are
based on the projected costs and
volumes of the genealogy program. The
projected costs include a portion of
Lockbox costs and an estimated staffing
requirement for genealogy workload.
USCIS estimated the workload volume
based on these proposed changes.
Additionally, USCIS used historic
information to calculate completion
rates for genealogy search and records
requests. The completion rates allow for
separate search and record request fees
based on the average time to complete
a request. As such, the proposed fees
each represent the average staff time
required to complete the request, similar
to most other fees proposed in this rule.
O. Naturalization and Citizenship
Related Forms
1. No Longer Limit the Form N–400 Fee
DHS proposes to increase the fee for
Form N–400, Application for
Naturalization, from $640 to $1,170, a
$530 or 83 percent increase. See 8 CFR

PO 00000

Frm 00038

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

103.7(b)(1)(BBB); proposed 8 CFR
106.2(b)(3). Prior fee rules shifted a
portion of the Form N–400 cost to other
fee-paying immigration benefit
requestors, such as applicants for
Certificates of Citizenship. In the FY
2010/2011 and the FY 2016/2017 fee
rules, the Form N–400 fee was set below
the ABC model output. The FY 2010/
2011 fee rule held the fee to $595, the
amount set in the FY 2008/2009 fee
rule. See 75 FR 58975. The FY 2016/
2017 fee rule limited the fee to only
$640, a $45 or 8 percent increase. See
81 FR 73307.
The FY 2010/2011 proposed rule
explained that holding Form N–400 to
the FY 2008/2009 fee raised all other
proposed fees by approximately $8
each. See 75 FR 33462. For DHS to
recover full cost of Form N–400, the FY
2010/2011 proposed fee would have
been $655, a $60 or roughly a 10 percent
increase. See 75 FR 33462–3. In the FY
2016/2017 fee rule supporting
documentation, USCIS estimated that
each Form N–400 may cost $871 to
complete, plus the cost for biometric
services of $75, for a total of $946.145
In crafting prior fee rules, DHS
reasoned that setting the Form N–400
fee at an amount less than its estimated
costs and shifting those costs to other
fee payers was appropriate in order to
promote naturalization and immigrant
integration.146 DHS now believes that
shifting costs to other applicants in this
manner is not equitable given the
significant increase in Form N–400
filings in recent years.147 Therefore,
DHS proposes to no longer limit the
Form N–400 fee, thereby mitigating the
fee increase of other immigration benefit
requests and implementing the
beneficiary-pays principle. DHS
proposes a $1,170 fee for Form N–400
to recover the full cost of adjudicating
the Form N–400, as well as a proportion
of costs not recovered by other forms for
which fees are limited or must be
offered a waiver by statute.148
145 See the Model Output column of Appendix
Table 4: Final Fees by Immigration Benefit Request
in the docket of the FY 2016/2017 fee rule. The
model output is the projected total cost from the
ABC model divided by projected fee-paying
volume. It is only a forecast unit cost (using a
budget) and not the actual unit cost (using spending
from prior years). USCIS does not track actual costs
by immigration benefit request.
146 See, e.g., 75 FR 33461; 81 FR 26916.
147 Based on filing volume trends in recent years,
USCIS forecasts an increase of 82,827 Form N–400
applications, nearly a 10% percent increase from
the FY 2016/2017 fee rule forecast. See Table 4:
Workload Volume Comparison.
148 See the supporting documentation of this
proposed rule, Appendix V: Proposed Fee
Adjustments to IEFA Immigration Benefits, for more
information.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62317

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
2. Remove Form N–400 Reduced Fee
In addition to eliminating Form N–
400 fee waiver requests, as explained
above at section V.C., DHS proposes to
remove the reduced fee option for those
naturalization applicants with family
incomes greater than 150 percent and
not more than 200 percent of the FPG
currently codified at 8 CFR
103.7(b)(1)(i)(BBB)(1). Currently,
qualifying applicants pay a fee of $320
plus an additional $85 for biometric
services, for a total of $405. To qualify
for a reduced fee, the eligible applicant
must submit a Form I–942, Request for
Reduced Fee, along with his or her
Form N–400. Form I–942 requires the
names of everyone in the household and
documentation of the household income
to determine if the applicant’s
household income is greater than 150
and not more than 200 percent of the
FPG. DHS implemented this reduced fee
option in the FY 2016/2017 fee rule to
limit any potential economic
disincentives that some eligible
naturalization applicants may face when
deciding whether to seek U.S.
citizenship. See 81 FR 73307. DHS now
proposes to eliminate the reduced fee
option and return to a policy of all
naturalization applicants paying the
same fee. For the same reasons
explained above with regard to no
longer limiting the Form N–400 fee,
DHS proposes to eliminate the reduced
fee in order to recover full cost for
naturalization services.149 The proposed
fees would also recover a portion of the
cost of adjudicating forms for which
USCIS is required by law to offer a fee
waiver request and where the fees are
limited by law, regulation, or policy,
referred to as cost reallocation in the
supporting documentation.150 DHS also

proposes to eliminate Form I–942
because there will no longer be a
purpose for it.
3. Military Naturalization and
Certificates of Citizenship
DHS does not propose any changes to
fee exemptions for military members
and veterans who file a Form N–400
under the military naturalization
provisions. Military naturalization
applications will continue to be fee
exempt. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(BBB)(2);
proposed 8 CFR 106.2(b)(3). USCIS does
not charge a fee to military
naturalization applicants because such
fees are prohibited by statute. See INA
secs. 328(b)(4), 329(b)(4). Applicants
who request a hearing on a
naturalization decision under INA
sections 328 or 329 with respect to
military service will continue to be fee
exempt. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(AAA);
proposed 8 CFR 106.2(b)(2). Members
and veterans of any branch of the U.S.
Armed Forces will continue to be
exempt from paying the fee for an
Application for Certificate of
Citizenship, Form N–600. See 8 CFR
103.7(b)(1)(EEE); proposed 8 CFR
106.2(b)(6). While the statute prohibits
fees for military naturalization
applicants themselves, the Department
of Defense (DOD) currently reimburses
USCIS for costs related to such
applications.151 Accordingly, USCIS
does not propose to increase fees to
subsidize the costs of military
naturalization applications.
4. Proposed Changes to Other
Naturalization-Related Application and
Certificate of Citizenship Application
Fees
DHS proposes to adjust fees for other
citizenship and naturalization forms.

Some of the proposed fees are
significant increases from the current
fees, but others are decreases to reflect
the estimated cost of adjudicating each
form.
In previous fee rules, DHS limited the
fee increase for several naturalizationrelated forms, in addition to Form N–
400. See 75 FR 33461 and 81 FR 26915.
These naturalization-related forms are
as follows:
• Form N–300, Application to File
Declaration of Intention
• Form N–336, Request for a Hearing
on a Decision in Naturalization
Proceedings (Under Section 336 of the
INA)
• Form N–470, Application to
Preserve Residence for Naturalization
Purposes.
In the FY 2016/2017 fee rule, USCIS
estimated that the cost of processing
each of these forms was significantly
greater than the fee.152 Consistent with
previous fee rules, DHS used its fee
setting discretion to limit the increase of
these fees, as shown in Table 14 of the
supporting documentation of the FY
2016/2017 fee rule. At the time, DHS
recognized that charging less than the
full cost of adjudicating these and other
immigration benefit requests required
USCIS to increase fees for other
immigration benefit requests to ensure
full cost recovery. See 81 FR 26915.
The proposed fees in this rule would
recover full cost for these immigration
benefit requests and a portion of cost
reallocation, using the standard
methodology described in the
supporting documentation included in
this docket. See proposed 8 CFR
106.2(b)(1), (2), (3), and (4).

TABLE 13—NATURALIZATION FEE-PAYING UNIT COSTS (MODEL OUTPUT) AND FEES COMPARED
FY 2016/
2017
Fee-paying
unit cost

Immigration benefit request

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

N–300 Application to File Declaration of Intention ...........................................
N–336 Request for a Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings
(Under Section 336 of the INA) .....................................................................
N–400 Application for Naturalization ................................................................
N–470 Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization Purposes ..........
N–565 Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document ......
N–600 Application for Certificate of Citizenship ...............................................

149 Recently, Congress encouraged USCIS ‘‘to
consider whether the current naturalization fee is
a barrier to naturalization for those earning between
150 percent and 200 percent of the federal poverty
guidelines, who are not currently eligible for a fee
waiver.’’ H. Rep. 115–948 at 61. Although USCIS
considered this report in formulating this proposed
rule, USCIS has determined that it is neither
equitable, nor in accordance with the principle of
self-sufficiency that Congress has frequently

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

Current fee

Frm 00039

Fmt 4701

FY 2018/
2019
Fee-paying
unit cost

Proposed
fee

Proposed
fee—
FY 2019/
2020
cost

$840

$270

¥$570

$1,111

$1,320

$209

1,294
871
792
399
841

700
640
355
555
1,170

¥594
¥231
¥437
156
329

1,474
985
1,347
458
853

1,755
1,170
1,600
545
1,015

281
185
253
87
162

emphasized, to continue to force certain other
applicants to subsidize fee-waived and reduced-fee
applications for naturalization applicants who are
unable to pay the full cost fee.
150 See footnote 40.
151 The proposed fee would increase the
reimbursable agreement between USCIS and DOD
by approximately $4 million. The current fees for
Form N–400 ($640) and biometric services ($85)
total $725 per military naturalization. In FY 2019/

PO 00000

Current
fee—FY
2016/2017
Cost

Sfmt 4702

2020, USCIS forecasts 9,300 military naturalizations
per year. Under the current fees, this would cost
DOD $6,742,500 each year. With the proposed
$1,170 Form N–400 fee (which includes the cost of
biometrics), the same volume would cost
$10,881,000, a $4,138,500 or approximately 61
percent increase.
152 See the Model Output column of Appendix
Table 4: Final Fees by Immigration Benefit Request
in the docket of the FY 2016/2017 fee rule.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62318

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 13—NATURALIZATION FEE-PAYING UNIT COSTS (MODEL OUTPUT) AND FEES COMPARED—Continued
FY 2016/
2017
Fee-paying
unit cost

Immigration benefit request

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

N–600K Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate Under Section 322 ..........................................................................................................

The proposed fees for Form N–600,
Application for Certificate of
Citizenship, and Form N–600K,
Application for Citizenship and
Issuance of Certificate Under Section
322, are lower than the current fees. The
current fee for both forms is $1,170. See
8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(EEE) and (FFF). In
the previous fee rule, USCIS proposed
and finalized a combined rate for both
forms. DHS proposes separate fees for
each, based on the estimated cost and
operational metrics for each workload.
See proposed 8 CFR 106.2(b)(6) and (7).
USCIS used separate completion rates
and fee-paying volumes for each
proposed fee.
The proposed fee decrease for Forms
N–600 and N–600K is mainly due to the
effect of the proposed limitation of fee
waivers, which will enable greater cost
recovery for several form types and limit
the need for cost reallocation to feepaying applicants. As noted in the FY
2016/2017 fee rule, the current fees for
Forms N–600 assumed that
approximately one third of applicants
would receive a fee waiver. See 81 FR
73928. To recover full cost, DHS set the
N–600 and the N–600K fee at a level
high enough for fee-paying applicants to
cover the cost of fee-waived work. Id.
Because fee waivers would be limited
under this proposed rule, fee-paying
Forms N–600 and N–600K would no
longer need to cover the cost of
adjudicating fee-waived Forms N–600
and N–600K.153 The proposed fees
provide for the full recovery of costs
associated with adjudicating the forms.
Therefore, DHS is proposing lower fees
for Forms N–600 and N–600K. The
proposed fee for Form N–600 is $1,015,
a $155 or 13 percent decrease from the
current $1,170 fee. See 8 CFR
103.7(b)(1)(i)(EEE); proposed 8 CFR
106.2(b)(6). The proposed fee for Form
N–600K is $960, a $210 or 18 percent
decrease from the current $1,170 fee.
See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(FFF); proposed
8 CFR 106.2(b)(7). DHS welcomes
comments on the proposed changes to
naturalization and Certificate of
Citizenship applications.
153 See V.C.3., Proposed Fee Waiver Changes
section of this preamble for more information.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

841

Current fee

1,170

P. Asylum Fees
1. Fee for Form I–589, Application for
Asylum and for Withholding of
Removal
DHS proposes to establish a $50 fee
for Form I–589, Application for Asylum
and for Withholding of Removal, when
that form is filed with USCIS
(‘‘affirmative asylum
applications’’).154 See proposed 8 CFR
106.2(a)(20). The U.S. Government has
never charged a fee for Form I–589, but
rather has relied on other fee-paying
benefit requestors to subsidize asylum
seeking applicants. Application fees
from other form types have always been
used to fund the operations involved in
processing asylum claims. See, e.g., 81
FR 73295 and 73307. However, DHS has
experienced a continuous, sizeable
increase in affirmative asylum filings,
and processing backlogs continue to
grow. DHS is exploring ways to alleviate
the pressure that the asylum workload
places on the administration of other
immigration benefits. A minimal fee
would mitigate the fee increase of other
immigration benefit requests.
Although the INA authorizes DHS to
set fees ‘‘at a level that will ensure
recovery of the full costs of providing all
such services, including the costs of
similar services provided without
charge to asylum applicants or other
immigrants,’’ INA sec. 286(m), 8 U.S.C.
1356(m), DHS proposes a $50 fee for
Form I–589. The statutory authorization
for fees allows, but does not require,
imposition of a fee equal to the full cost
of the services provided. Thus, DHS
retains authority to impose asylum fees
that are less than the estimated cost of
adjudicating the applications. See INA
sec. 208(d)(3), 8 U.S.C. 1158(d)(3).155 In
154 Affirmative asylum applications are
distinguished from defensive asylum applications,
which are filed in proceedings before an
immigration judge. See, e.g., 8 CFR 1240.11(c).
155 This section states, ‘‘The Attorney General
may impose fees for the consideration of an
application for asylum, for employment
authorization under this section, and for adjustment
of status under section 209(b). Such fees shall not
exceed the Attorney General’s costs in adjudicating
the applications. The Attorney General may provide
for the assessment and payment of such fees over
a period of time or by installments. Nothing in this
paragraph shall be construed to require the
Attorney General to charge fees for adjudication

PO 00000

Frm 00040

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Current
fee—FY
2016/2017
Cost

FY 2018/
2019
Fee-paying
unit cost

329

806

Proposed
fee

960

Proposed
fee—
FY 2019/
2020
cost
154

the FY 2019/2020 fee review, USCIS
estimates that the cost of adjudicating
Form I–589 is approximately $366. It
represents the Asylum Division’s
salaries and Make Determination
activity costs from the ABC model,
which does not represent the full cost.
It does not include estimated costs from
any other Asylum Division activities or
any other office within USCIS.156
Therefore, the proposed $50 fee is in
accord with INA section 208(d)(3),
1158(d)(3).157
To be clear, DHS is proposing a fee for
a Form I–589 filed with DHS only.
Whether the fee also will apply to a
Form I–589 filed with EOIR is a matter
within the jurisdiction of the
Department of Justice rather than DHS,
subject to the laws and regulations
governing the fees charged in EOIR
immigration proceedings. DHS also
believes that the asylum fee may
arguably be constrained in amount, but
not prohibited, by the 1951 U.N.
Convention Relating to the Status of
Refugees (‘‘1951 Convention’’) and the
1967 U.N. Protocol Relating to the
Status of Refugees (‘‘1967 Protocol’’).158
The international treaty obligations of
the United States under the 1951
Convention and the 1967 Protocol
address the imposition of fees on
individuals seeking protection, and
services provided to asylum applicants, or to limit
the authority of the Attorney General to set
adjudication and naturalization fees in accordance
with section 286(m).’’
156 The FY 2019/2020 fee review assigned
Asylum Division projected costs into the following
other activities: Conduct TECS Check; Fraud
Detection and Prevention; Inform the Public; Intake;
Management and Oversight; Records Management.
See the fee review supporting documentation
included in this docket for the definitions of these
activities and other information.
157 The Immigration and Naturalization Service
(INS), the predecessor to USCIS, proposed
implementing a waivable $130 fee for asylum in
1994. See 59 FR 62284 (Dec. 5, 1994). INS did not
include a fee in the final rule. The proposed $130
fee would be approximately $222 if adjusted for
inflation from December 1994 to June 2019.
158 1951 Convention relating to the Status of
Refugees, opened for signature July 28, 1951, 19
U.S.T. 6259, 189 U.N.T.S. 137; 1967 Protocol
relating to the Status of Refugees, open for signature
Jan. 31, 1967, 19 U.S.T. 6223, 606 U.N.T.S. 267.
Although the United States is not a signatory to the
1951 Convention, it adheres to Articles 2 through
34 of the 1951 Convention by operation of the 1967
Protocol, to which the United States acceded on
Nov. 1, 1968.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
limit ‘‘fiscal charges’’ to not higher than
those charged to their nationals in
similar situations. Accordingly, any fee
charged would need to be reasonably
aligned with the fees charged for other
immigration benefit requests.159 The
proposed $50 fee is in accord with this
provision.
This proposal is also consistent with
a Presidential Memorandum directing
the Attorney General and the Secretary
of Homeland Security, as applicable, to
take all appropriate actions to propose
regulations setting a fee for an asylum

application not to exceed the costs of
adjudicating the application, as
authorized by section 208(d)(3) of the
INA (8 U.S.C. 1158(d)(3)) and other
applicable statutes, and setting a fee for
an initial application for employment
authorization for the period an asylum
claim is pending.160
Additionally, DHS considered the
asylum fees charged by other nations.
To determine the fiscal charges charged
by other countries, USCIS requested a
report from the Law Library of Congress
on fees charged to asylum applicants by

62319

countries that are party to the 1951
Convention and/or its 1967 Protocol.161
The Law Library of Congress surveyed
the 147 signatory countries to the 1951
Convention and/or the 1967 Protocol,
and of 147 countries, identified three
countries that charge a fee for initial
applications for asylum or refugee
protection.162 Those countries and
amounts, provided in Table 14, indicate
that the proposed $50 fee is in line with
the fiscal charges charged by other
countries.163

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

TABLE 14—ASYLUM FEES IN OTHER COUNTRIES
Country

Fee amount

Fee in USD

Australia ............
Fiji .....................
Iran ...................

AUD 35 ...........................................
FJD 465 ..........................................
IRR 12,321,000 ..............................

$25
221
293

Notes
No fee for a detained applicant.
Allows for fee waivers.
For a family of 5 with some fee exemptions.

The projected FY 2019/2020 workload
for Form I–589 is 163,000 annual
receipts, or approximately 2 percent of
the total USCIS workload forecast. The
proposed $50 fee would generate an
estimated $8.15 million in annual
revenue. Therefore, in addition to
alleviating pressure on the immigration
benefit system, the proposed $50 fee for
Form I–589 mitigates the proposed fee
increase of other immigration benefit
requests by approximately $5 or $10.
DHS is proposing no fee for an
unaccompanied alien child (UAC) in
removal proceedings who files Form I–
589. The Trafficking Victims Protection
Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) of 2000
provides for a range of protections for
UACs as amended by the William
Wilberforce Trafficking Victims
Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008.
Public Law 110–457, 122 Stat. 5044
(2008). A UAC is defined by statute as
a child who is less than 18 years old,
has no legal status in the U.S., and has
no parent or legal guardian in the U.S.
who is available to provide care and
physical custody. 6 U.S.C. 279(g)(2).

Among other provisions, the TVPRA
gives USCIS initial jurisdiction over
asylum claims filed by UACs, even by
those who are in removal proceedings
before EOIR such that their asylum
applications would otherwise be within
the jurisdiction of an immigration judge.
Section 235(d)(7)(B) of the TVPRA, as
codified at 8 U.S.C. 1158(b)(3)(C),
provides that ‘‘[a]n asylum officer . . .
[in the U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services’ (‘‘USCIS’’)
Asylum Division] . . . shall have initial
jurisdiction over any asylum application
filed by an unaccompanied alien child.’’
In accordance with the statute governing
asylum applications filed by UACs, they
may file their Form I–589 with USCIS,
even if they are in removal proceedings
and their asylum claims are thus
asserted as a defense to removal.
Consistent with the protections
provided to UACs by the TVPRA, and
to avoid undue delay for this vulnerable
population by impeding UACs in
removal proceedings from filing a Form
I–589, DHS proposes to exclude them
from the proposed fees. A UAC who is

not in removal proceedings will be
charged the same proposed $50 Form I–
589 fee as other affirmative filers.
As discussed in section V.C. of this
preamble on fee waivers, DHS proposes
that the $50 Form I–589, Application for
Asylum and Withholding of Removal,
fee will not be waivable. The proposed
$50 fee would generate an estimated
$8.15 million in annual revenue. If DHS
permits fee waiver requests, it assumes
that the costs of administering the fee
waiver request review process may
exceed the revenue, thereby offsetting
any cost recovery achieved from the fee.
Therefore, DHS proposes that the $50
Form I–589 fee is mandatory. DHS
acknowledges that an alien who is not
placed in removal proceedings will have
no means of applying for recognition as
a person in need of refugee protection
and its attendant benefits such as
asylum or withholding-based
employment authorization, travel
documents, or documentation of
immigration status, if they do not pay
the proposed $50 fee.164 That is why
although INA section 208(d)(3), 8 U.S.C.

159 To the extent that the asylum application fee
may arguably be considered to be a ‘‘fiscal charge’’
for purposes of Article 29(1) of the 1951 Convention
Relating to the Status of Refugees—as incorporated
by reference in the 1967 Protocol Relating to the
Status of Refugees—the proposed $50 fee would be
in accord with that provision, which limits ‘‘fiscal
charges’’ charged to refugees to an amount not
higher than those charged by the United States to
U.S. nationals in similar situations. The proposed
$50 fee would be reasonably aligned with the fees
charged to U.S. nationals for other immigration
benefit requests. And Congress, as evidenced by the
express authority conferred in INA section
208(d)(3), clearly does not believe that charging a
fee for asylum applications would run contrary to
U.S. obligations under the 1967 Protocol. See also
INS v. Stevic, 467 U.S. 407, 428 n.22 (1984)

(describing provisions of the Convention and
Protocol as ‘‘precatory and not self-executing’’).
160 See Presidential Memorandum on Additional
Measures to Enhance Border Security and Restore
Integrity to Our Immigration System (Apr. 29,
2019), available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/
presidential-actions/presidential-memorandumadditional-measures-enhance-border-securityrestore-integrity-immigration-system/ (last visited
Aug. 6, 2019).
161 See Library of Congress, Fees Charged for
Asylum Applications by States Parties to the 1951
Refugee Convention (Dec. 29, 2017), https://
www.loc.gov/law/help/asylum-application-fees/
index.php.
162 Additionally, while it does not charge a fee for
making a claim for refugee or protection status, New
Zealand typically grants individuals a ‘‘Refugee
Claimant Visitor Visa’’ while claims are processed

and charges for that visa (although that fee may be
waived). Canada does not charge for making a claim
of protection, but does charge for obtaining proof
of permanent protection.
163 Exchange rates as of June 30, 2019. See
Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Fiscal
Service, Treasury Reporting Rates of Exchange:
Current Rates (Aug. 14, 2019), https://
www.fiscal.treasury.gov/reports-statements/
treasury-reporting-rates-exchange/current.html.
164 See, e.g., 1951 Refugee Convention Art. 27
(‘‘The Contracting States shall issue identity papers
to any refugee in their territory who does not
possess a valid travel document.’’), Art. 28(1) (‘‘The
Contracting States shall issue to refugees lawfully
staying in their territory travel documents for the
purpose of travel outside their territory, unless
compelling reasons of national security or public
order otherwise require . . . .’’).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

PO 00000

Frm 00041

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62320

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

1158(d)(3) expressly authorizes charging
a fee up to the full cost of providing the
service, DHS is proposing a fee of $50
instead of at the level permitted under
the INA to recover costs. In addition,
DHS does not want the inability to pay
the fee to be an extraordinary
circumstance excusing an applicant
from meeting the one-year filing
deadline in INA 208(a)(2)(B), (D). See
also 8 CFR 208.4(a)(5)(v)
(‘‘extraordinary circumstances’’
includes situations in which the alien
filed the Form I–589 prior to 1-yr
deadline but application was returned
as not properly filed, and then alien
refiled within reasonable period
thereafter). DHS considered the
authority provided in INA section
208(d)(3), including that the fee be paid
in installments or over time, various fee
amounts and decided to propose $50
because it could be paid in one
payment, would not require an alien an
unreasonable amount of time to save,
would generate some revenue to offset
costs, discourage frivolous filings, and
not be so high as to be unaffordable to
even an indigent alien. DHS welcomes
comments on the imposition of this fee,
including the amount and whether it
should be waivable.
2. Fee for the Initial Application for
Employment Authorization While an
Asylum Claim Is Pending

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

DHS proposes to require applicants
who have applied for asylum or
withholding of removal before EOIR
(defensive asylum) or filed Form I–589
with USCIS (affirmative asylum), to pay
the fee for initial filings of Form I–765.
Currently, USCIS exempts applicants
with pending asylum applications who
are filing their first EAD application
under the 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(8) eligibility
category from the Form I–765 fee if the
applicant submits evidence of an
asylum application and follows other
instructions.165 Applicants with
pending claims of asylum pay the fee for
EAD renewal and replacement, per
Form I–765 instructions and pursuant to
8 CFR 274a.12(c)(8).166 USCIS projects
165 This fee exemption is provided in the
Instructions to Form I–765, Application for
Employment Authorization, by the USCIS Director
or Deputy Director under the authority in 8 CFR
103.7(d); see also 8 CFR 274a.13(a)(applicants for
EADs may be required to apply on a designated
form and pay fees in accordance with form
instructions).
166 Class members subject to the settlement
agreement under American Baptist Churches v.
Thornburgh, 760 F. Supp. 796 (N.D. Cal. 1991), will
be charged the fee generally applicable to
employment authorization applications as proposed
in this rule. The revised form instructions for Form
I–765, Application for Employment Authorization,
provide that class members may request that their

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:10 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

that this change will require
approximately 300,000 asylum
applicants to pay the Form I–765 fee
each year. USCIS will continue to
require the fee for renewal EADs.
Initial applicants with pending claims
of asylum are approximately 13 percent
of the total Form I–765 workload
volume forecast. Continuing to exempt
this population from paying the Form I–
765 fee would further increase the
proposed fee. If DHS exempts initial
applicants with pending claims of
asylum, then the proposed fee would be
$500 instead of $490, meaning feepaying EAD applicants would pay $10
to fund the cost of EADs for asylum
applicants. Therefore, DHS proposes
that initial applicants with pending
asylum claims pay a $490 Form I–765
fee in order to keep the fee lower for all
fee-paying EAD applicants. All other
noncitizens applying for employment
authorization are required to pay fees.
See 8 CFR 274a.13. DHS notes that INA
section 208(d)(3), 8 U.S.C. 1158(d)(3),
seems to limit the amount that can be
charged for employment authorization
for an asylum applicant where it states,
‘‘Such fees shall not exceed the
Attorney General’s costs in adjudicating
the applications.’’ However, section
208(d)(3) also states, ‘‘Nothing in this
paragraph shall be construed to require
the Attorney General to charge fees for
adjudication services provided to
asylum applicants, or to limit the
authority of the Attorney General to set
adjudication and naturalization fees in
accordance with section 1356(m) of this
title.’’ That sentence permits DHS to
charge asylum applicants the same fee
for employment authorization that it
charges all others for employment
authorization because we calculate the
proposed fee for the Form I–765,
Application for Employment
Authorization Document, using the feesetting methodology outlined in this
rule in accordance with INA sec.
286(m), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m). The proposed
EAD fee ensures asylum applicants will
pay no more for an EAD than any other
EAD applicant except those for whom
the fee has been waived. Therefore, the
fee for Form I–765 proposed to be
charged to asylum applicants complies
with section 208(d)(3).
Q. DACA Renewal Fees
DHS proposes to add a fee for
Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals
(DACA) renewal requests. See proposed
8 CFR 106.2(a)(38). Currently, DACA
requestors use Form I–821D,
Consideration of Deferred Action for
fee be waived, as required by that agreement using
the authority in proposed 8 CFR 106.3(d).

PO 00000

Frm 00042

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Childhood Arrivals, for DACA renewal
requests. Form I–821D currently has no
fee. However, DACA requestors must
pay the current fees of $410 and $85 for
Form I–765 and biometrics services,
respectively, which total $495 and may
not be waived, although currently there
are very limited circumstances where a
fee exemption may be granted under
DACA policy criteria. The proposed
Form I–821D filing fee for renewal
DACA requests is $275.167 168 This
proposed filing fee for Form I–821D
includes the cost of biometric services.
Under the proposal, DACA requestors
would still need to pay the filing fee for
Form I–765 unless they qualify for an
exemption, as provided through
policy.169 The proposed Form I–821D
fee to request DACA renewal, plus the
EAD fee, is $765. DHS proposes that
DACA fees may not be waived,
consistent with its current policy. One
of the focuses of DACA when it was
launched in 2012 is that the processing
of DACA requests, including associated
applications for employment
authorization, does not result in an
economic drain on DHS resources.
Therefore, DHS set a standard for the
exemption from the Form I–765 fee for
DACA requests in a manner that
balances the needs of the most
vulnerable population likely to request
DACA against USCIS’ fiscal
requirements for implementing the
DACA initiative. A DACA requestor
who requested Form I–765 fee
exemptions faced significant delays in
adjudicating the deferred action and the
EAD request. Requests for DACA
renewal will come from individuals
who have had authorization to work
lawfully in the U.S. for up to two years
167 Currently, DHS may also accept a limited
number of requests from individuals who
previously received DACA but whose most recent
DACA grant expired before September 5, 2017 or
was terminated at any time. Although these
requests are filed as initial DACA requests because
the individual is no longer eligible to file a renewal
request under longstanding DACA policy, these
requests would be subject to the proposed fee for
renewal requests because two nationwide
preliminary injunctions currently require USCIS to
allow anyone who previously received DACA to
request additional periods of deferred action and
employment authorization.
168 DHS does not propose to introduce a fee for
Form I–821D initial DACA requests because USCIS
does not currently accept such requests, except as
described in footnote 167 above, or plan to accept
them in the future. Should USCIS be required to
accept initial DACA requests in the future, DHS
would charge requestors the proposed $30
biometrics fee, because biometrics costs associated
with these requests would not be recovered via the
application fee of $0.
169 See USCIS, Frequently Asked Questions,
https://www.uscis.gov/archive/frequently-askedquestions (last reviewed/edited March 8, 2018).

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
and DHS assumes that these individuals
will have found work and are currently
working. Therefore, DHS proposes a

62321

consistent policy and will require the
Form I–765 fee for DACA renewal.

TABLE 15—CURRENT AND PROPOSED DACA RENEWAL FEES COMPARED

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

DACA renewal request fees

Current fees

Proposed fees

Difference

Percentage
difference

I–765 Application for Employment Authorization .............................................
I–821D Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Renewal) ..
Biometric Services ...........................................................................................

$410
0
85

$490
275
N/A

$80
275
N/A

20%
N/A
N/A

Total DACA Fees (Renewal) ....................................................................

495

765

270

55

The proposed Form I–821D fee does
not include cost reallocation.170 In other
words, it does not recover any of the
cost for workload without fees or with
reduced fees. As such, the DACA
workload in the proposed Form I–765
does not recover the projected costs of
workload without fees or with fees
below projected full cost. DHS proposes
to not assign cost reallocation to the
Form I–821D fee to mitigate the fiscal
risk of relying on revenue from DACA
in the event the DACA policy is ended
in the future. However, the non-DACA
related workload for Form I–765 does
include cost reallocation. The Form I–
765 proposed fee would be higher if
both DACA and non-DACA workload
included cost reallocation of workload
without fees or with fees below
projected full cost.
In September 2017, DHS rescinded
the 2012 DACA memo and initiated a
plan to wind down the policy, while
opting not to terminate DACA and EADs
for individuals who had a previously
approved DACA request, based solely
on the rescission. At present, however,
DHS is operating under two nationwide
preliminary injunctions issued by
federal district courts in California
(Regents of University of California v.
DHS, No. 17–cv–05211 (N.D. Cal.)) and
New York (State of New York v. Trump,
No. 17–cv–05228 (E.D.N.Y.)). These
injunctions require DHS to ‘‘maintain
the DACA program on a nationwide
basis on the same terms and conditions
as were in effect before the rescission on
September 5, 2017.’’ Under these
injunctions, DHS is not required to
accept DACA requests from individuals
who have not previously been granted
DACA and is not required to accept
DACA-based advance parole
applications. The District Court for the
District of Columbia also vacated DHS’s
rescission of DACA and ordered the
government to accept initial DACA
requests and resume accepting DACAbased advance parole applications.
170 See section IV.B.3. Assessing Proposed Fees
for more information.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:10 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

However, the court then ordered a
limited stay of its order to preserve the
status quo pending appeal. Trustees of
Princeton University v. United States,
No. 1:17–cv–2325 (D.D.C.), consolidated
with NAACP v. Trump, No. 17–cv–
01907 (D.D.C.). Additionally, the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
issued a decision that vacated the DACA
rescission as arbitrary and capricious
and remanded the case for further
proceedings, reversing a ruling by the
District Court for the District of
Maryland. However, the Fourth Circuit
subsequently stayed issuance of the
mandate pending resolution of the
Government’s petition for writ of
certiorari. See Casa de Maryland v.
DHS, Nos. 18–1521–L; 18–1522 (4th Cir.
2019). Therefore, USCIS is currently
required to continue accepting and
adjudicating DACA requests from
individuals who have previously been
granted DACA, but is not required to
accept requests from other individuals,
or applications for DACA-based advance
parole. DHS plans to file a request with
the subject courts to allow DHS to
implement all of the changes proposed
in this rule to the extent that they may
affect past, current, or future DACA
recipients.
Currently, individuals who request
deferred action under DACA do so
without paying a fee that recovers the
full cost to adjudicate such requests.
Therefore, other applicants, petitioners,
and requestors ultimately bear the
burden to cover the full cost of DACA
adjudications. While the DHS request
for the courts to approve the effects of
this proposed rule on DACA are
pending, DHS publishes this NPRM for
public comment on the proposed DACA
fees. If any of the courts deny DHS’s
request to impose new DACA fees, then
Form I–821D fees will be removed
before the final rule is adopted and the
costs of administering DACA will be
reallocated to fee-paying immigration
benefit requests. As such, the fee for
Form I–765 may increase. Refer to
section VII. Other Possible Fee

PO 00000

Frm 00043

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Scenarios for additional information
regarding potential fees with and
without a fee for Form I–821D.
R. Fees Shared by CBP and USCIS
DHS combined the estimated cost and
volume information for USCIS and CBP
in the proposed fees for several
immigration benefit requests that both
components adjudicate. This affects the
proposed fees for the following
immigration benefit requests:
• Form I–192, Application for
Advance Permission to Enter as a
Nonimmigrant.
• Form I–193, Application for Waiver
of Passport and/or Visa.
• Form I–212, Application for
Permission to Reapply for Admission
into the U.S. after Deportation or
Removal.
• Form I–824, Application for Action
on an Approved Application or Petition.
USCIS calculated proposed fees using
the same methodology as other
proposed fees and then added
information from CBP into the ABC
model. CBP provided revenue
collections from FY 2014 to FY 2017 for
these immigration benefit requests. We
divided the revenue collections by the
fee for each immigration benefit request
to derive the fee-paying volume for each
immigration benefit request. CBP
estimates the total cost for Forms I–192
and I–193 as part of its statement of net
cost, leveraging the same software that
USCIS uses for the ABC model.171 CBP
does not estimate the total cost of Forms
I–212 or I–824. Dividing CBP’s total
costs by fee-paying volume can
determine a fee-paying unit cost, and
ultimately, fees for Forms I–192 and I–
171 USCIS uses commercially available activitybased costing software, SAP Business Objects
Profitability and Cost Management, to create
financial models to implement activity-based
costing (ABC), as described in the Methodology
section of this preamble and the supporting
documentation in the docket for this proposed rule.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62322

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

193. Table 16 summarizes the CBP cost
estimates, derived fee-paying volumes,
and estimated unit costs.

estimates, derived fee-paying volumes,
and estimated unit costs.

TABLE 16—CBP FY 2017 ESTIMATED COSTS AND VOLUMES
Estimated
cost

Form
I–192
I–193
I–212
I–824

............................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

USCIS incorporated the total costs
and derived fee-paying volume for the
respective CBP workloads into the ABC
model. The proposed fees represent
single DHS fees for each of these
workloads by combining the estimated
costs and fee-paying volumes of USCIS
and CBP. DHS believes that a single fee
for each of these shared workloads will
reduce confusion for individuals
interacting with CBP and USCIS.
S. 9–11 Response and Biometric EntryExit Fee for H–1B and L–1 Visas
In 2010 Congress enacted new fees for
certain H–1B or L petitioners. See
Public Law 111–230, sec. 402.172 USCIS
concluded at that time that the statutory
language in section 402 of Public Law
111–230 was ambiguous and required it
to interpret the statute and determine
the full extent to which the fee would
apply. In particular, the statute referred
to the filing fee and fraud prevention
and detection fee required to be
submitted with an application for
admission, but it was otherwise silent
regarding petitions for H–1B or L
classification or for requests for a
change of status or extension of stay for
beneficiaries who were already admitted
into the United States. USCIS
interpreted the statute’s ambiguity to
apply the fees to petitions for H–1B or
L–1 classification when the fraud fee
was otherwise required because the
statutory language referred to these fees
as being collected in addition to the
already extant filing and fraud
prevention and detection fees. USCIS,
therefore, implemented these fees as
applying only when the fraud fee was
otherwise collected, in accordance with
section 214(c)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C.
1184(c)(12); that is, with respect to
172 Public Law 111–230 required the submission
of an additional fee of $2,000 for certain H–1B
petitions and $2,250 for certain L–1A and L–1B
petitions. These additional fees, similar to the
subsequently enacted fees under Public Law 114–
113, applied to petitioners who employ 50 or more
employees in the United States with more than 50
percent of its employees in the United States in
H–1B or L–1 nonimmigrant status.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:10 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

petitions for an initial grant of status or
requesting a change of employer, but not
to extension petitions filed by the same
employer on behalf of the same
employee. The Public Law 111–230 fee
sunset on September 30, 2015.
In section 402(g) of Div. O of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016
(Public Law 114–113) 173 enacted
December 18, 2015, Congress reenacted
and doubled these fees, effective
immediately through September 30,
2025.174 Although otherwise identical to
the earlier Public Law 111–230 statutory
language except for the relevant dates
and dollar amounts,175 Congress added
new phrasing at two places, in pertinent
part: ‘‘. . . the combined filing fee and
fraud prevention and detection fee
required to be submitted with an
application for admission [as an H–1B
or L], including an application for an
extension of such status, shall be
increased . . .’’ (emphasis added).
There is no known legislative history
about the Public Law 114–113 fees
before enactment.
USCIS again concluded that the
language in Public Law 114–113, as in
the previous statute, was ambiguous and
therefore USCIS had to determine
whether the fee applied to all extension
173 Section 402(g) of Div. O of Public Law 114–
113 added a new section 411 to the Air
Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act,
49 U.S.C. 40101 note. Section 411 provided that the
fees collected thereunder would be divided 50/50
between general Treasury and a new ‘‘9–11
Response and Biometric Exit Account’’, until
deposits into the latter amounted to $1 billion, at
which point further collections would go only to
general Treasury. Deposits into the 9–11 account
are available to DHS for a biometric entry-exit
screening system as described in 8 U.S.C. 1365b.
174 This sunset date was extended another two
years, until September 30, 2027, by section 30203
of Public Law 115–123 (Feb. 9, 2018).
175 The new provision’s ‘‘notwithstanding section
281 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1351) or any other provision of law’’ clause,
unlike the 2010 enactment, expressly referred to
sec. 281 of the INA, but this difference made no
legal difference in the scope of the clause, as that
clause is not meaningfully different from
‘‘Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act or
any other provision of law’’ clause in Public Law
111–230 sec. 402.

PO 00000

Frm 00044

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

$2,154,502
17,951,942
N/A
N/A

Derived
fee-paying
volume
6,557
7,613
232
103

Estimated
fee-paying
unit cost
$329
2,358
N/A
N/A

petitions by covered employers, or just
those for which the fraud fee was also
charged (extension of stay with change
of employer).176 The first reading would
be a significant new substantive
expansion of the fees compared to the
2010–2015 interpretation; the latter
would be consistent with the scope of
the fees charged during that earlier
period (although in the higher amounts
provided by the new provision). In the
absence of specific legislative history
elucidating the intent of the statutory
changes, and given the continued
ambiguity of the statute (specifically the
reference to the ‘‘combined filing fee
($4,000 for H–1B and $4,500 for L–1
respectively) and fraud prevention and
detection fee ($500) required to be
submitted’’), USCIS interpreted the
Public Law 114–113 fee to similarly
apply only when the fraud fee described
in section 214(c)(12) of the INA, 8
U.S.C. 1184(c)(12), is also required and
issued guidance accordingly.177
The construction of the statutory
ambiguity USCIS adopted in 2015 was
not, however, the only reasonable one.
176 In enacting the new statute, Congress used the
same wording of the previous statute, with the
addition of the words ‘‘combined’’ and ‘‘including
an application for an extension of such status.’’
Because Congress can be assumed to have been
aware of the agency’s interpretation of the previous
statute, USCIS concluded, as an initial matter, that
Congress added the phrase ‘‘including an
application for an extension of such status’’ to
clarify that the new fees not only apply to initial
petitions for H–1B or L classification, but also in
extension of stay cases. However, it was not clear
whether Congress meant the new fees to apply to
all extension of stay requests (a substantive change)
or just a certain subset of cases, meaning, those
involving an initial petition by a new employer on
behalf of an individual already in H–1B or L–1
status who is seeking an extension of stay (a
clarification). Further, the fact that Congress not
only also included the specific reference to the
fraud fee, but in fact reinforced the significance of
that reference by inserting the word ‘‘combined,’’
made ambiguous whether Congress intended the fee
to apply to all extension cases or just those that
required the fraud fee.
177 See ‘‘Fee Increase for Certain H–1B and L–1
Petitions (Pub. L. 114–113)’’ at https://
www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/temporaryworkers/fee-increase-certain-h-1b-and-l-1-petitionspublic-law-114-113 (last reviewed/updated Feb. 20,
2018).

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Another reasonable interpretation is that
the Public Law 114–113 fee applies to
all extension of stay petitions even
when the fraud fee is not applicable.
Under this alternative interpretation, the
language ‘‘including an application for
an extension of such status’’ is a
substantive amendment, and the
insertion of the word ‘‘combined’’ is a
clarifying one. It is plausible that
Congress added the reference to
extension of status so that the fee would
be collected for all extension of stay
petitions, not just those where a change
of employer is also requested. In that
case, the insertion of the word
‘‘combined’’ can be viewed as a
clarifying edit that the increase to the
fee is applied only once per petition and
not once for the filing fee and once for
the fraud fee such that it might apply
two times for some petitions.
Furthermore, when the fraud fee does
not apply, the ‘‘combined’’ fee is simply
the filing fee plus $0. This interpretation
would give meaning to all the
alterations to the earlier statute.
DHS has reexamined this matter and
believes that this second, alternative
interpretation of Public Law 114–113
would be most consistent with the goal
of the statute to ensure employers that
overly rely on H–1B or L nonimmigrant
workers’ pay an additional fee by
making the fee applicable to all
petitions by employers that meet the
statute’s 50 employee/50 percent test,
regardless of whether or not the fraud
fee also applies.178 In other words, the
fee should apply to all H–1B or L–1
petitions, whether for new employment
or an extension of stay. DHS thus
proposes to amend and clarify the
regulations at new 8 CFR 106.2(c)(8) and
(9)—currently 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(III)
and (JJJ)—to specify that this fee will
apply to all H–1B and L–1 extension
petitions in addition to all previously
covered H–1B and L–1 petitions. The
regulation would clarify that this
includes individual L–1 petitions (Form
I–129S) filed on the basis of a
previously approved ‘‘blanket L’’
petition, but it does not apply to
amended petitions filed by employers
with respect to its employee that do not
request an extension of stay. The
amended regulation would also update
178 USCIS counts all full-time and part-time
employees when determining whether an employer
must pay this fee. H–1B and all L–1 employees are
combined in the counting to determine if the 50%
threshold is met to trigger the fee. See https://
www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/temporaryworkers/fee-increase-certain-h-1b-and-l-1-petitionspublic-law-114-113. DHS is adding the words ‘‘in
the aggregate’’ to proposed 8 CFR 106.2(c)(8) and (9)
to clarify its interpretation and how employees
would be counted, consistent with current practice,
to determine if this additional fee is required.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:10 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

the sunset date for the provision from
September 30, 2025 to September 30,
2027, as provided in Public Law 115–
123. It would further provide for
alternative fee amounts or sunset dates
in case Congress changes them by a
subsequently enacted law.
Beyond the above, various policy
reasons support this change in DHS’s
implementation of the Public Law 114–
113 fee provision. Fee collections under
the provision are applied towards the
important purposes of (1) funding the 9–
11 Response and Biometric Fee Exit
Account to be used for a biometric
entry-exit screening system; and (2)
deficit reduction and other public
purposes funded by general Treasury
revenues. Collections have fallen well
short of projections. In its report on the
fee provision in Public Law 114–113,
the Congressional Budget Office (CBO)
estimated annual revenues of $420
million per year (except for $380
million in the first year of FY 2016)
from these fees through their
lifespan.179 However, collections for FY
2016 ($158 million), 2017 ($125
million), and 2018 ($119 million)
totaled only about $402 million. DHS
believes that collections have fallen
short of the CBO projections mainly
because of the USCIS construction of
the statutory provision to exclude
extension petitions except when filed to
facilitate a change of employer. DHS
proposes to reduce this shortfall and
better achieve the funding aims of the
statute through increased collections of
these fees in the future.
T. Form I–881, Application for
Suspension of Deportation or Special
Rule Cancellation of Removal (Pursuant
to Section 203 of Public Law 105–100
(NACARA))
DHS proposes to adjust the fee for
Form I–881, Application for Suspension
of Deportation or Special Rule
Cancellation of Removal (Pursuant to
Section 203 of Pub. L. 105–100
(NACARA)). The IEFA fees for this
application have not changed since
2005. The proposed fees more
accurately reflect USCIS’ estimated
costs associated with adjudicating the
application. Additionally, DHS
proposes to combine the current
multiple fees into a single Form I–881
fee in effort to reduce administrative
burden.
INS implemented two fees for this
benefit request in 1999. See 63 FR 64895
(Nov. 24, 1998) (proposed rule) and 64
179 See CBO Cost Estimate, H.R. 2029 Amendment
#1 (2016 Omnibus), table 3 at sec. 402, https://
www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/114th-congress2015-2016/costestimate/hr2029amendment1
divisionsa.pdf (Dec. 16, 2015).

PO 00000

Frm 00045

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62323

FR 27856 (May 21, 1999) (interim final
rule). The two IEFA fees were $215 for
an individual and $430 as a maximum
per family. See 64 FR 27867–8. EOIR
collected a separate $100 fee. Id. INS
used ABC to determine the proposed
IEFA fees. See 63 FR 64900. The IEFA
NACARA fees have only changed by
inflation since creation of the NACARA
program. See 69 FR 20528 (Apr. 15,
2004) and 70 FR 56182 (Sept. 26, 2005).
The current fees are as follows:
1. $285 for individuals,
2. $570 maximum for families, and
3. $165 at EOIR, whether an
individual or family.
In FY 2018, the fees generated
approximately $142,000 in IEFA
revenue, when approximately 98
percent of applicants paid the $285 fee.
EOIR provided receipt information for
FY 2016 to FY 2018. EOIR received 339
applications in FY 2016, 326 in FY
2017, and 277 in FY 2018. DHS
proposes no changes to the EOIR fee.
In prior fee rules, DHS has not
changed the Form I–881 fees. See 72 FR
29854, 75 FR 58964, and 75 FR 73312.
It excluded this immigration benefit
request from previous fee rules,
essentially treating it like other
temporary programs or policies such as
TPS and DACA. See 81 FR 73312. DHS
expects the population will be
exhausted eventually due to relevant
eligibility requirements. Id.
DHS proposes a single $1,800 fee for
any Form I–881 filed with USCIS. See
proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(41). USCIS
does not have systems in place that can
track the different adjudicative level of
effort required between Form I–881
applications by an individual compared
to a family. Regardless, DHS does not
have any policy reasons that would
justify charging a separate fee for a small
population that will soon be exhausted.
Additionally, removing the distinction
will simplify USCIS’ revenue
collections and reporting, thus reducing
the administrative burden of the
program.
USCIS forecasts an average of 340
annual Form I–881 receipts in the FY
2019/2020 biennial period. Current
USCIS fees would generate
approximately $100,000 in IEFA
revenue. The proposed single fee of
$1,800 would generate approximately
$612,000 in revenue and slightly
mitigate the proposed fee increase of
other immigration benefit requests.
U. Miscellaneous Technical and
Procedural Changes
DHS proposes several technical or
procedural changes. This rule moves the
fee regulations for USCIS to a separate
part of Chapter I of Title 8 of the Code

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62324

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

of Federal Regulations. It moves them
from 8 CFR part 103 to 8 CFR part 106
in an effort to reduce the length and
density of part 103 as well as to make
it easier to locate specific fee provisions.
In addition to the renumbering and
redesignating of paragraphs, this rule
has reorganized and reworded some
sections to improve readability.
DHS proposes to remove some
redundant text and consolidate USCIS
fee requirements. For example, some
regulations erroneously specified that
USCIS will not accept personal
checks.180 See, e.g., 8 CFR 245a.2(e)(3),
245a.3(d)(3), and 245a.4(b)(5)(iii). DHS
proposes to remove the erroneous or
redundant text and instead refer to
consolidated fee requirements in 8 CFR
106.1. See proposed 8 CFR 106.1,
245a.2(e)(3), 245a.3(d)(3), and
245a.4(b)(5)(iii).
DHS proposes to revise 8 CFR
214.2(p)(2)(iv)(F) to incorporate
statutory changes that have occurred
after 8 CFR 214.2(p)(2)(iv)(F) was
codified and to conform this regulatory
language to longstanding practice that
allow petitions for multiple P
nonimmigrants. Specifically, DHS
proposes to add a reference to ‘‘team’’ in
8 CFR 214.2(p)(2)(iv)(F) to account for
INA section 214(c)(4)(G), 8 U.S.C.
1184(c)(4)(G) (‘‘The Secretary of
Homeland Security shall permit a
petition under this subsection to seek
classification of more than 1 alien as a
nonimmigrant under section
1101(a)(15)(P)(i)(a) of this title’’), which
was added in 2006 and mandates DHS
to allow a petitioner to include multiple
P–1A athletes in one petition.181 DHS
also proposes to delete ‘‘seeking
classification based on the reputation of
the group as an entity’’ from 8 CFR
214.2(p)(2)(iv)(F) because certain
athletic teams applying for P–1

nonimmigrant classification and groups
applying for P–2 or P–3 nonimmigrant
classification are not necessarily
required to establish reputation of the
team or group as an entity. Id.
DHS proposes to update regulations
regarding adjustment of status under
INA section 245(i), 8 U.S.C. 1255(i),
commonly referred to as the Legal
Immigration Family Equity (LIFE) Act.
The current regulations are inconsistent
with Form I–485 instructions. DHS
proposes to refer to the current form
instructions and supporting evidence
requirements. See proposed 245a.12(d).
DHS also proposes to remove outdated
requirements for passport photos,
biographic and biometric information.
See proposed 8 CFR 245a.12(d), (d)(2),
and (d)(4). In the past, USCIS required
applicants and beneficiaries to submit a
fingerprint form or biographic
information with benefit requests.
Currently, USCIS collects biometric data
at Application Support Centers.
DHS proposes to change outdated
references to the Missouri Service
Center, now named the National
Benefits Center.182 See proposed 8 CFR
245a.12(b) and (c); 245a.13(e) and (e)(1);
245a.18(c)(1); 245a.19(a); and 245a.33(a)
and (b). The National Benefits Center
(NBC) performs centralized front-end
processing of applications and petitions
that require field office interviews
(primarily, Forms I–485 and N–400). In
addition, the NBC adjudicates some
form types to completion, including but
not limited to intercountry adoption
cases and immigration benefits
associated with the LIFE Act. The old
name is why some receipt notices for
the NBC begin with the letters ‘‘MSC’’
instead of ‘‘NBC.’’
DHS also proposes to amend the title
of 8 CFR part 103 to make it more
descriptive of its contents. See proposed

8 CFR part 103. The current title of part
103 is IMMIGRATION BENEFITS;
BIOMETRIC REQUIREMENTS;
AVAILABILITY OF RECORDS. Part 103
contains several significant requires for
filing requests, forms and documents
with USCIS, especially in 8 CFR 103.2,
which should be made more clear to the
users of that part. Therefore, DHS
proposes to revise the title of the part to
include a reference to filing
requirements. The proposed title is,
‘‘PART 103—IMMIGRATION BENEFIT
REQUESTS; USCIS FILING
REQUIREMENTS; BIOMETRIC
REQUIREMENTS; AVAILABILITY OF
RECORDS.’’
In addition, DHS is proposing a
severability provision in new 8 CFR part
106. DHS believes that the provisions of
each new part function sensibly
independent of other provisions.
However, to protect the goals for which
this rule is being proposed DHS is
codifying our intent that the provisions
be severable so that, if necessary, the
regulations can continue to function
without a stricken provision. Proposed
8 CFR 106.6.
VI. Proposed Fee Adjustments to IEFA
Immigration Benefits
Projected USCIS costs for FY 2019
and 2020 exceed projected revenue by
an average of $1,262.3 million each
year. Therefore, DHS proposes to adjust
the fee schedule to recover the full cost
of processing immigration benefit
requests and to continue to maintain or
improve current service delivery
standards.
After resource costs are identified, the
ABC model distributes them to USCIS’
primary processing activities. Table 17
outlines total IEFA costs by activity.

TABLE 17—PROJECTED IEFA COSTS BY ACTIVITY
[Dollars in millions]

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Activity

FY 2019

Conduct TECS Check .................................................................................................................
Direct Costs .................................................................................................................................
Fraud Detection and Prevention ..................................................................................................
Inform the Public ..........................................................................................................................
Intake ...........................................................................................................................................
Issue Document ...........................................................................................................................
Make Determination .....................................................................................................................
Management and Oversight ........................................................................................................
Perform Biometrics Services subtotal .........................................................................................
Manage Biometric Services ..................................................................................................
Collect Biometric Data ..........................................................................................................
Check Fingerprints ...............................................................................................................
180 For additional information on how to pay
USCIS filing fees, see USCIS, Paying USCIS Fees
available at, https://www.uscis.gov/forms/payinguscis-fees (last reviewed/updated Feb. 14, 2018).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:10 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

181 See Public Law 109–463, 120 Stat. 3477
(2006).
182 USCIS, National Benefits Center: What It Is
and What It Does available from, https://

PO 00000

Frm 00046

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

$139.7
59.6
335.8
402.0
135.5
71.1
1,644.3
1,148.7
222.8
67.8
81.6
34.6

FY 2020
$148.6
60.7
378.7
422.8
138.6
72.6
1,753.5
1,169.8
228.3
70.4
83.1
35.3

FY 2019/2020
average
$144.2
60.1
357.3
412.4
137.1
71.9
1,698.9
1,159.2
225.6
69.1
82.4
34.9

www.uscis.gov/archive/blog/2012/06/nationalbenefits-center-what-it-is-and (released June 5,
2012).

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

62325

TABLE 17—PROJECTED IEFA COSTS BY ACTIVITY—Continued
[Dollars in millions]
Activity

FY 2019

FY 2020

FY 2019/2020
average

Check Name .........................................................................................................................
Records Management .................................................................................................................
Research Genealogy ...................................................................................................................
Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements .............................................................................

38.8
349.6
2.0
47.0

39.6
358.8
2.0
48.3

39.2
354.2
2.0
47.7

Total IEFA Costs ..................................................................................................................

4,558.1

4,782.9

4,670.5

Next, the ABC model distributes
activity costs to immigration benefit
requests. Table 18 summarizes total

revenue by immigration benefit request
based on the proposed fee schedule.

TABLE 18—PROJECTED FY 2019/2020 AVERAGE ANNUAL REVENUE PER IMMIGRATION BENEFIT WITH PROPOSED FEES
[Dollars in millions]
Revenue
forecast

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Immigration benefit request
I–90 Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card ...................................................................................................................
I–102 Application for Replacement/Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival-Departure Document ....................................................................
I–129 Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker Subtotal .........................................................................................................................
I–129H1B—Named Beneficiaries .................................................................................................................................................
I–129H2A—Named Beneficiaries .................................................................................................................................................
I–129H2B—Named Beneficiaries .................................................................................................................................................
I–129L—Named Beneficiaries ......................................................................................................................................................
I–129O ..........................................................................................................................................................................................
I–129CW, I–129E&TN, and I–129MISC .......................................................................................................................................
I–129H2A—Unnamed Beneficiaries .............................................................................................................................................
I–129H2B—Unnamed Beneficiaries .............................................................................................................................................
I–129F Petition for Alien Fiance´(e) ...................................................................................................................................................
I–130 Petition for Alien Relative ........................................................................................................................................................
I–131 Application for Travel Document .............................................................................................................................................
I–131 Refugee Travel Document for an individual age 16 or older .................................................................................................
I–131 Refugee Travel Document for a child under the age of 16 ....................................................................................................
I–131A Application for Carrier Documentation .................................................................................................................................
I–140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker ........................................................................................................................................
I–191 Application for Relief Under Former Section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) .......................................
I–192 Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant .............................................................................................
I–193 Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa ......................................................................................................................
I–212 Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission into the U.S. After Deportation or Removal .......................................
I–290B Notice of Appeal or Motion ...................................................................................................................................................
I–360 Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er) or Special Immigrant .......................................................................................................
I–485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status ............................................................................................
I–526 Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur ...............................................................................................................................
I–539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status ..............................................................................................................
I–589 Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal ........................................................................................................
I–600/600A; I–800/800A Intercountry Adoption-Related Petitions and Applications ........................................................................
I–600A/I–600 Supplement 3 Request for Action on Approved Form I–600A/I–600 ........................................................................
I–601 Application for Waiver of Ground of Excludability ..................................................................................................................
I–601A Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver .................................................................................................................................
I–612 Application for Waiver of the Foreign Residence Requirement (Under Section 212(e) of the INA, as Amended) ...............
I–687 Application for Status as a Temporary Resident ....................................................................................................................
I–690 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility ..............................................................................................................
I–694 Notice of Appeal of Decision ..................................................................................................................................................
I–698 Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A of the INA) .............................
I–751 Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence ........................................................................................................................
I–765 Application for Employment Authorization ..............................................................................................................................
I–800A Supplement 3 Request for Action on Approved Form I–800A ............................................................................................
I–817 Application for Family Unity Benefits ......................................................................................................................................
I–821D Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Renewal) ...................................................................................
I–824 Application for Action on an Approved Application or Petition ...............................................................................................
I–829 Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions on Permanent Resident Status .................................................................
I–881 Application for Suspension of Deportation or Special Rule Cancellation of Removal ...........................................................
I–910 Application for Civil Surgeon Designation ..............................................................................................................................
I–924 Application For Regional Center Designation Under the Immigrant Investor Program .........................................................
I–924A Annual Certification of Regional Center ...............................................................................................................................
I–929 Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U–1 Nonimmigrant .............................................................................................
N–300 Application to File Declaration of Intention ...........................................................................................................................
N–336 Request for a Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings ...................................................................................

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:10 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

PO 00000

Frm 00047

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

$283.33
3.51
330.30
237.05
3.41
1.64
33.82
18.20
30.66
3.82
1.70
24.92
541.90
170.27
3.00
0.14
9.90
87.75
0.21
32.23
21.40
6.33
14.60
1.92
572.24
56.21
89.56
8.15
4.98
0.31
20.40
64.32
0.31
0.00
0.02
0.01
0.16
113.18
941.82
0.31
0.81
108.90
5.57
13.65
0.61
0.34
9.25
4.25
1.53
0.01
6.80

62326

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 18—PROJECTED FY 2019/2020 AVERAGE ANNUAL REVENUE PER IMMIGRATION BENEFIT WITH PROPOSED FEES—
Continued
[Dollars in millions]
Revenue
forecast

Immigration benefit request
N–400 Application for Naturalization .................................................................................................................................................
N–470 Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization Purposes ..........................................................................................
N–565 Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document ......................................................................................
N–600/600K Naturalization Certificate Application Subtotal .............................................................................................................
N–600 Application for Certificate of Citizenship ........................................................................................................................
N–600K Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate Under Section 322 ................................................................
USCIS Immigrant Fee .......................................................................................................................................................................
Biometric Services ...............................................................................................................................................................................
G–1041 Genealogy Index Search Request ......................................................................................................................................
G–1041A Genealogy Records Request ............................................................................................................................................

949.72
0.17
12.78
50.41
47.56
2.85
114.49
8.55
1.12
0.98

Total ..............................................................................................................................................................................................

4,693.62

Table 19 depicts the current and
proposed USCIS fees for immigration
benefit requests and biometric services.

For a more detailed description of the
basis for the changes described in this
table, see Appendix Table 3 in the FY

2019/2020 Fee Review Supporting
Documentation accompanying this
proposed rule.

TABLE 19—PROPOSED FEES BY IMMIGRATION BENEFIT
Current
fee

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Immigration benefit request
I–90 Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card ...............................
I–102 Application for Replacement/Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival-Departure
Document .....................................................................................................
I–129 Petition for a Nonimmigrant worker ....................................................
I–129H1 I–129 H–1B—Named Beneficiaries ................................................
I–129H2A I–129 H–2A—Named Beneficiaries .............................................
I–129H2B I–129 H–2B—Named Beneficiaries .............................................
I–129L Petition for L Nonimmigrant Worker ..................................................
I–129O Petition for O Nonimmigrant Worker ................................................
I–129CW, I–129E&TN, and I–129MISCV Petition for a CNMI-Only Nonimmigrant Transitional Worker; Application for Nonimmigrant Worker: E
and TN Classification; and Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H–3, P, Q,
or R Classification. .......................................................................................
I–129H2A I–129 H–2A—Unnamed Beneficiaries .........................................
I–129H2B I–129 H–2B—Unnamed Beneficiaries .........................................
I–129F Petition for Alien Fiance´(e) ...............................................................
I–130 Petition for Alien Relative ....................................................................
I–131 Application for Travel Document .........................................................
I–131 Travel Document for an individual age 16 or older ............................
I–131 I–131 Refugee Travel Document for a child under the age of 16 ......
I–131A Application for Carrier Documentation ..............................................
I–140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker ....................................................
I–191 Application for Relief Under Former Section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) .......................................................................
I–192 Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant .........
I–193 Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa ..................................
I–212 Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission into the U.S.
After Deportation or Removal ......................................................................
I–290B Notice of Appeal or Motion ...............................................................
I–360 Petition for Amerasian Widow(er) or Special Immigrant .....................
I–485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status ........
I–526 Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur ...........................................
I–539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status ..........................
I–589 Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal ....................
I–600/600A Petition to Classify Orphan as an Immediate Relative/Application for Advance Processing of an Orphan Petition ....................................
I–600A/I–600 Supp. 3 Request for Action on Approved Form I–600A/I–600
I–601 Application for Waiver of Ground of Excludability ..............................
I–601A Application for Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver .....................
I–612 Application for Waiver of the Foreign Residence Requirement
(Under Section 212(e) of the INA, as Amended) ........................................
I–687 Application for Status as a Temporary Resident under Section 245A
of the Immigration and Nationality Act .........................................................
I–690 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility ..........................
I–694 Notice of Appeal of Decision ..............................................................

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:10 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

PO 00000

Frm 00048

Fmt 4701

Proposed
fee

Delta
($)

Percent
change

$455

$415

¥$40

¥9%

445
460
460
460
460
460
460

490
N/A
560
860
725
815
715

45
N/A
100
400
265
355
255

10
N/A
22
87
58
77
55

460
460
460
535
535
575
135
105
575
700

705
425
395
520
555
585
145
115
1,010
545

245
¥35
¥65
¥15
20
10
10
10
435
¥155

53
¥8
¥14
¥3
4
2
7
10
76
¥22

930
585

800
1,415
2,790

¥130
830/485
2,205

¥14
142/52
377

930
675
435
184 1,140/750
3,675
370
0

1,040
705
455
1,120
4,015
400
50

110
30
20
¥20/370
340
30
50

12
4
5
¥2/49
9
8
N/A

775
N/A
930
630

810
405
985
960

35
N/A
55
330

5
N/A
6
52

930

525

¥405

¥44

1,130
715
890

1,130
770
725

0
55
¥165

0
8
¥19

183 585/930

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

62327

TABLE 19—PROPOSED FEES BY IMMIGRATION BENEFIT—Continued
Current
fee

Immigration benefit request
I–698 Application to Adjust Status From Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A of the INA) .........................................................
I–751 Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence ....................................
I–765 Application for Employment Authorization ..........................................
I–800/800A Petition to Classify Convention Adoptee as an Immediate Relative/Application for Determination of Suitability to Adopt a Child from a
Convention Country .....................................................................................
I–800A Supp. 3 Request for Action on Approved Form I–800A ..................
I–817 Application for Family Unity Benefits ..................................................
I–821D Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Renewal)
I–824 Application for Action on an Approved Application or Petition ...........
I–829 Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions on Permanent Resident Status ...................................................................................................
I–881 Application for Suspension of Deportation or Special Rule Cancellation of Removal ............................................................................................
I–910 Application for Civil Surgeon Designation ...........................................
I–924 Application for Regional Center Designation Under the Immigrant
Investor Program ..........................................................................................
I–924A Annual Certification of Regional Center ...........................................
I–929 Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U–1 Nonimmigrant .........
I–941 Application for Entrepreneur Parole ....................................................
N–300 Application to File Declaration of Intention ........................................
N–336 Request for a Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings
N–400 Application for Naturalization .............................................................
N–470 Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization Purposes ......
N–565 Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document ..
N–600 Application for Certificate of Citizenship ............................................
N–600K Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate Under Section 322 ........................................................................................................
USCIS Immigrant Fee ...................................................................................
G–1041 Genealogy Index Search Request ..................................................
G–1041A Genealogy Records Request ........................................................
Biometric Services ...........................................................................................

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

VII. Other Possible Fee Scenarios
Subject to certain limitations, the fees
that DHS proposes in this rule may
change in the subsequent final rule
based on policy decisions, in response
to public comments, intervening
legislation, and other changes. DHS will
explain any changes between the
proposed and final fees. Nevertheless,
DHS notes that the content of a final
rule, beyond public comments and
policy modifications, appreciably
depends on two factors that are to some
extent beyond its control. As previously
described, this rule includes a proposed
183 The current fee for Form I–192 is 585 when
filed with and processed by CBP. When filed with
USCIS, the fee is 930. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(P).
184 The 750 fee applies to ‘‘an applicant under the
age of 14 years when [the application] is (i)
submitted concurrently with the Form I–485 of a
parent, (ii) the applicant is seeking to adjust status
as a derivative of his or her parent, and (iii) the
child’s application is based on a relationship to the
same individual who is the basis for the child’s
parent’s adjustment of status, or under the same
legal authority as the parent.’’ See 8 CFR
103.7(b)(1)(i)(U)(2).
185 Currently there are two USCISs fees for Form
I–881: $285 for individuals and $570 for families.
See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(QQ)(1). EOIR has a separate
$165 fee. DHS proposes no changes to the EOIR fee.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:10 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

Proposed
fee

PO 00000

1,615
760
490

¥55
165
80

¥3
28
20

775
385
600
0
465

810
405
590
275
500

35
20
¥10
275
35

5
5
¥2
N/A
8

3,750

3,900

150

4

185 285/570

785

1,800
650

1,515/1,230
¥135

532/216
¥17

17,795
3,035
230
1,200
270
700
640/320
355
555
1,170

17,795
4,470
1,515
1,200
1,320
1,755
1,170
1,600
545
1,015

0
1,435
1,285
0
1,050
1,055
530
1,245
¥10
¥155

0
47
559
0
389
151
83
266
¥2
¥13

1,170
220
65
65
85

960
200
240
385
30

¥210
¥20
175
320
¥55

¥18
¥9
269
492
¥65

footnotes 167 and 168.

Frm 00049

Fmt 4701

Percent
change

1,670
595
410

DACA renewal fee associated with Form
I–821D. See section V.Q. DACA Fees of
this preamble. However, DHS is
currently operating under two
nationwide preliminary injunctions to
maintain the DACA policy. DHS is not
currently accepting initial DACA
requests, except in limited
circumstances.186 USCIS evaluated
separate DACA initial and renewal fees
in case that changes. Additionally, the
proposed fees include USCIS funding
$207.6 million of ICE expenses
associated with adjudication and
naturalization services in both FY 2019
and FY 2020. See section IV.A.1.a. Use
IEFA Fee Collections to Fund ICE
Activities of this preamble. Any
combination of those proposals may not
materialize because DHS must obtain
relief from the DACA preliminary
injunctions. This rule also proposes the
transfer of IEFA funds to ICE consistent
with the Administration’s budget
requests for fiscal years 2019 and 2020.
If Congress rejects the Administration’s
request, or if DHS does not ultimately
shift these costs from annual
appropriations to the IEFA, USCIS will
not include this use of these funds in its
186 See

Delta
($)

Sfmt 4702

fee model for the final rule.
Uncertainties associated with each
aspect of the rule could result in
changes to the final fees.187
To reduce the uncertainty that such
conditions present to the affected
public, USCIS proposes and evaluates
six fee scenarios based on these three
factors. Each scenario lays out what the
fees would be if certain conditions
materialize and present a range of fees.
Thus, the final fees may be one of the
scenarios presented, or an amount in
between the highest and lowest fees
proposed. Scenario A refers to the
proposed fees described in detail
throughout this proposed rule. Scenario
B includes DACA renewal fees, but it
excludes the ICE transfer. Scenario C
excludes DACA fees, but it includes the
ICE transfer. Scenario D excludes both
DACA fees and the ICE transfer.
187 In addition, litigation regarding various fees
may result in DHS not implementing certain fees or
fee increases. DHS is considering whether to
include a severability provision in the final fee rule,
or ‘‘fallback’’ provisions that provide for alternative
fee schedules in the event that certain aspects of the
rule are not implemented. DHS requests comment
on this option.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62328

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Scenarios E and F list separate initial
and renewal fees for DACA, with or
without the ICE transfer. Table 20 lists

the assumptions and effects of these
three factors on each fee scenario. The
following sections briefly describe the

differences and list the possible fees in
each scenario.

TABLE 20—PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE SCENARIOS

A
B
C
D
E
F

......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................

Average
budget
($ millions)

DACA renewal
fees included

DACA initial
fee included

ICE Transfer
included

Yes ..................................
Yes ..................................
No ....................................
No ....................................
Yes ..................................
Yes ..................................

No ....................................
No ....................................
No ....................................
No ....................................
Yes ..................................
Yes ..................................

Yes ..................................
No ....................................
Yes ..................................
No ....................................
Yes ..................................
No ....................................

Fee scenario

A. Fee Schedule With DACA Renewal
Fees
Scenarios A and B produced fee levels
in between the highest and lowest

scenarios. Table 21 lists the individual
fees for each. These fees are lower than
in some scenarios because DACA fees
recover part of USCIS costs. Scenario B

Percent
weighted
average fee
increase 188

$4,670.5
4,462.9
4,651.7
4,444.2
4,672.4
4,464.8

21%
15
25
20
20
15

produces lower fees than Scenario A
because it has a lower budget by
excluding the ICE transfer.

TABLE 21—PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE WITH DACA RENEWAL FEE WITH AND WITHOUT THE ICE TRANSFER

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Immigration benefit request

Scenario A

I–90 Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card .......................................................................................
I–102 Application for Replacement/Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival-Departure Document ........................................
I–129 Petition for a Nonimmigrant worker ..............................................................................................................
I–129H1B—Named Beneficiaries .....................................................................................................................
I–129H2A—Named Beneficiaries .....................................................................................................................
I–129H2B—Named Beneficiaries .....................................................................................................................
I–129L—Named Beneficiaries ..........................................................................................................................
I–129O ..............................................................................................................................................................
I–129CW, I–129E&TN, and I–129MISC ...........................................................................................................
I–129H2A—Unnamed Beneficiaries .................................................................................................................
I–129H2B—Unnamed Beneficiaries .................................................................................................................
I–129F Petition for Alien Fiance´(e) .......................................................................................................................
I–130 Petition for Alien Relative ............................................................................................................................
I–131 Application for Travel Document .................................................................................................................
I–131 Refugee Travel Document for an individual age 16 or older .....................................................................
I–131 Refugee Travel Document for a child under the age of 16 ........................................................................
I–131A Application for Carrier Documentation .....................................................................................................
I–140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker ............................................................................................................
I–191 Application for Relief Under Former Section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) ...........
I–192 Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant .................................................................
I–193 Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa ..........................................................................................
I–212 Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission into the U.S. After Deportation or Removal ...........
I–290B Notice of Appeal or Motion .......................................................................................................................
I–360 Petition for Amerasian Widow(er) or Special Immigrant ............................................................................
I–485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status ................................................................
I–526 Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur ...................................................................................................
I–539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status ..................................................................................
I–589 Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal ............................................................................
I–600/600A Orphan Adoption-Related Petitions and Applications .......................................................................
I–600A Supplement 3 Request for Action on Approved Form I–600A ................................................................
I–601 Application for Waiver of Ground of Excludability ......................................................................................
I–601A Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver .....................................................................................................
I–612 Application for Waiver of the Foreign Residence Requirement (Under Section 212(e) of the INA, as
Amended) .............................................................................................................................................................
I–687 Application for Status as a Temporary Resident ........................................................................................
I–690 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility ..................................................................................
I–694 Notice of Appeal of Decision ......................................................................................................................
I–698 Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A of the INA)
I–751 Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence ............................................................................................
I–765 Application for Employment Authorization ..................................................................................................
I–800/800A Hague Adoption Convention Adoption-Related Petitions and Applications ......................................
I–800A Supplement 3 Request for Action on Approved Form I–800A ................................................................
I–817 Application for Family Unity Benefits ..........................................................................................................
I–821D Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Initial) .............................................................
I–821D Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Renewal) .......................................................
I–824 Application for Action on an Approved Application or Petition ...................................................................
I–829 Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions on Permanent Resident Status .....................................
188 See footnote 6 for more information on the
weighted averages in the fee schedule.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:10 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

PO 00000

Frm 00050

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Scenario B

$415
490
N/A
560
860
725
815
715
705
425
395
520
555
585
145
115
1,010
545
800
1,415
2,790
1,040
705
455
1,120
4,015
400
50
810
405
985
960

$385
465
N/A
535
840
700
795
690
685
400
370
495
535
550
145
115
1,010
520
780
1,355
2,805
1,025
675
435
1,095
4,010
375
50
770
385
965
940

525
1,130
770
725
1,615
760
490
805
405
590
0
275
500
3,900

495
1,130
745
705
1,600
735
455
770
385
565
0
250
475
3,895

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

62329

TABLE 21—PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE WITH DACA RENEWAL FEE WITH AND WITHOUT THE ICE TRANSFER—Continued
Immigration benefit request

Scenario A

I–881 Application for Suspension of Deportation or Special Rule Cancellation of Removal ...............................
I–910 Application for Civil Surgeon Designation ..................................................................................................
I–924 Application For Regional Center Designation Under the Immigrant Investor Program .............................
I–924A Annual Certification of Regional Center ...................................................................................................
I–929 Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U–1 Nonimmigrant .................................................................
N–300 Application to File Declaration of Intention ...............................................................................................
N–336 Request for a Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings .......................................................
N–400 Application for Naturalization .....................................................................................................................
N–470 Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization Purposes ..............................................................
N–565 Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document ..........................................................
N–600 Application for Certificate of Citizenship ...................................................................................................
N–600K Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate Under Section 322 ...........................................
USCIS Immigrant Fee ...........................................................................................................................................
Biometric Services ...................................................................................................................................................
G–1041 Genealogy Index Search Request ..........................................................................................................
G–1041A Genealogy Records Request ................................................................................................................

B. Fee Schedule Without DACA Fees
Scenarios C and D exclude DACA
workload from the fee schedules. Table
22 lists the fees for these scenarios.
These scenarios produced some of the
highest fees because they do not include
DACA fee-paying volume to recover a
portion of the projected budget. The fee

review budget in these scenarios is
lower than scenarios A, B, E, and F
because USCIS removed certain
estimated costs related to DACA, so as
to mitigate the financial risk to USCIS
of dependence upon revenue associated
with a temporary program that may be
eliminated in the future.189 However,
the decrease to the budget from DACA

1,800
650
17,795
4,470
1,515
1,320
1,755
1,170
1,600
545
1,015
960
200
30
240
385

Scenario B
1,785
625
17,795
4,470
1,465
1,305
1,730
1,150
1,585
515
985
940
175
30
240
385

does not offset the fee increase. Scenario
C yields the highest fees in some cases
because it includes the ICE transfer in
the budget. Scenario D fees may be
higher or lower than the proposed fees
in scenario A because it has the lowest
total budget, but it excludes DACA feepaying volume to recover a portion of
the projected budget.

TABLE 22—FEE SCHEDULE WITHOUT DACA FEES AND WITH OR WITHOUT THE ICE TRANSFER

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Immigration benefit request

Scenario C

I–90 Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card .......................................................................................
I–102 Application for Replacement/Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival-Departure Document ........................................
I–129 Petition for a Nonimmigrant worker ............................................................................................................
I–129H1B—Named Beneficiaries .....................................................................................................................
I–129H2A—Named Beneficiaries .....................................................................................................................
I–129H2B—Named Beneficiaries .....................................................................................................................
I–129L—Named Beneficiaries ..........................................................................................................................
I–129O ..............................................................................................................................................................
I–129CW, I–129E&TN, and I–129MISC ...........................................................................................................
I–129H2A—Unnamed Beneficiaries .................................................................................................................
I–129H2B—Unnamed Beneficiaries .................................................................................................................
I–129F Petition for Alien Fiance´(e) .......................................................................................................................
I–130 Petition for Alien Relative ............................................................................................................................
I–131 Application for Travel Document .................................................................................................................
I–131 Refugee Travel Document for an individual age 16 or older .....................................................................
I–131 Refugee Travel Document for a child under the age of 16 ........................................................................
I–131A Application for Carrier Documentation .....................................................................................................
I–140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker ............................................................................................................
I–191 Application for Relief Under Former Section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) ...........
I–192 Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant .................................................................
I–193 Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa ..........................................................................................
I–212 Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission into the U.S. After Deportation or Removal ...........
I–290B Notice of Appeal or Motion .......................................................................................................................
I–360 Petition for Amerasian Widow(er) or Special Immigrant ............................................................................
I–485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status ................................................................
I–526 Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur ...................................................................................................
I–539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status ..................................................................................
I–589 Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal ............................................................................
I–600/600A Orphan Adoption-Related Petitions and Applications .......................................................................
I–600A Supplement 3 Request for Action on Approved Form I–600A ................................................................
I–601 Application for Waiver of Ground of Excludability ......................................................................................
I–601A Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver .....................................................................................................
189 In the FY 2019/2020 fee review scenarios
without DACA fees, USCIS removed contractual
costs related to DACA from the ABC model. These
excluded costs were for form intake, biometric

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

collection, and EAD card production for DACA
volumes. While DHS did not discuss the
methodology in the FY 2016/2017 fee rule docket,
DHS took a similar approach to exclude temporary

PO 00000

Frm 00051

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

$440
510
0
585
870
735
830
725
720
440
410
535
575
625
145
115
1,015
580
815
1,465
2,775
1,070
735
475
1,155
4,015
420
50
845
420
1,035
980

Scenario D
$410
480
0
555
850
710
805
705
695
410
385
510
550
585
145
115
1,010
555
790
1,395
2,790
1,050
700
450
1,125
4,005
395
50
770
400
1,010
960

or uncertain costs related to temporary programs.
See 81 FR 26914.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62330

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 22—FEE SCHEDULE WITHOUT DACA FEES AND WITH OR WITHOUT THE ICE TRANSFER—Continued
Immigration benefit request

Scenario C

I–612 Application for Waiver of the Foreign Residence Requirement (Under Section 212(e) of the INA, as
Amended) .............................................................................................................................................................
I–687 Application for Status as a Temporary Resident ........................................................................................
I–690 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility ..................................................................................
I–694 Notice of Appeal of Decision ......................................................................................................................
I–698 Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A of the INA)
I–751 Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence ............................................................................................
I–765 Application for Employment Authorization ..................................................................................................
I–800/800A Hague Adoption Convention Adoption-Related Petitions and Applications ......................................
I–800A Supplement 3 Request for Action on Approved Form I–800A ................................................................
I–817 Application for Family Unity Benefits ..........................................................................................................
I–821D Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Initial) .............................................................
I–821D Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Renewal) .......................................................
I–824 Application for Action on an Approved Application or Petition ...................................................................
I–829 Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions on Permanent Resident Status .....................................
I–881 Application for Suspension of Deportation or Special Rule Cancellation of Removal ...............................
I–910 Application for Civil Surgeon Designation ..................................................................................................
I–924 Application For Regional Center Designation Under the Immigrant Investor Program .............................
I–924A Annual Certification of Regional Center ...................................................................................................
I–929 Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U–1 Nonimmigrant .................................................................
N–300 Application to File Declaration of Intention ...............................................................................................
N–336 Request for a Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings .......................................................
N–400 Application for Naturalization .....................................................................................................................
N–470 Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization Purposes ..............................................................
N–565 Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document ..........................................................
N–600 Application for Certificate of Citizenship ...................................................................................................
N–600K Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate ..........................................................................
USCIS Immigrant Fee ...........................................................................................................................................
Biometric Services ...................................................................................................................................................
G–1041 Genealogy Index Search Request ..........................................................................................................
G–1041A Genealogy Records Request ................................................................................................................

C. Fee Schedule With Both DACA Initial
and Renewal Fees
In scenarios E and F, USCIS adds its
forecast of 43,000 initial requests for

DACA. While the fee review budget is
slightly higher than scenarios A and B,
the increased fee-paying volume

545
1,130
790
740
1,635
780
590
845
420
615
N/A
N/A
520
3,905
1,825
660
17,795
4,465
1,535
1,340
1,770
1,195
1,615
580
1,035
975
215
30
240
385

Scenario D
515
1,130
760
715
1,615
755
550
805
400
590
N/A
N/A
495
3,895
1,805
635
17,795
4,460
1,480
1,315
1,745
1,170
1,595
550
1,005
950
185
30
240
385

produces some of the lowest fees. Table
23 lists the fees in these scenarios.

TABLE 23—FEE SCHEDULE WITH DACA INITIAL AND RENEWAL FEES

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Immigration benefit request

Scenario E

I–90 Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card .......................................................................................
I–102 Application for Replacement/Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival-Departure Document ........................................
I–129 Petition for a Nonimmigrant worker ............................................................................................................
I–129H1—Named Beneficiaries .......................................................................................................................
I–129H2A—Named Beneficiaries .....................................................................................................................
I–129H2B—Named Beneficiaries .....................................................................................................................
I–129L—Named Beneficiaries ..........................................................................................................................
I–129O ..............................................................................................................................................................
I–129CW, I–129E&TN, and I–129MISC ...........................................................................................................
I–129H2A—Unnamed Beneficiaries .................................................................................................................
I–129H2B—Unnamed Beneficiaries .................................................................................................................
I–129F Petition for Alien Fiance´(e) .......................................................................................................................
I–130 Petition for Alien Relative ............................................................................................................................
I–131 Application for Travel Document .................................................................................................................
I–131 Refugee Travel Document for an individual age 16 or older .....................................................................
I–131 Refugee Travel Document for a child under the age of 16 ........................................................................
I–131A Application for Carrier Documentation .....................................................................................................
I–140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker ............................................................................................................
I–191 Application for Relief Under Former Section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) ...........
I–192 Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant .................................................................
I–193 Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa ..........................................................................................
I–212 Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission into the U.S. After Deportation or Removal ...........
I–290B Notice of Appeal or Motion .......................................................................................................................
I–360 Petition for Amerasian Widow(er) or Special Immigrant ............................................................................
I–485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status ................................................................
I–526 Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur ...................................................................................................
I–539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status ..................................................................................
I–589 Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal ............................................................................

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

PO 00000

Frm 00052

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

$415
485
0
550
810
705
790
695
680
405
390
500
550
585
145
115
1,010
545
800
1,415
2,790
1,040
700
455
1,120
4,015
390
50

Scenario F
$385
460
0
520
790
685
770
670
660
385
365
475
530
550
145
115
1,010
520
780
1,350
2,805
1,020
670
430
1,095
4,010
370
50

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

62331

TABLE 23—FEE SCHEDULE WITH DACA INITIAL AND RENEWAL FEES—Continued
Immigration benefit request

Scenario E

I–600/600A Orphan Adoption-Related Petitions and Applications .......................................................................
I–600A Supplement 3 Request for Action on Approved Form I–600A ................................................................
I–601 Application for Waiver of Ground of Excludability ......................................................................................
I–601A Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver .....................................................................................................
I–612 Application for Waiver of the Foreign Residence Requirement (Under Section 212(e) of the INA, as
Amended) .............................................................................................................................................................
I–687 Application for Status as a Temporary Resident ........................................................................................
I–690 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility ..................................................................................
I–694 Notice of Appeal of Decision ......................................................................................................................
I–698 Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A of the INA)
I–751 Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence ............................................................................................
I–765 Application for Employment Authorization ..................................................................................................
I–800/800A Hague Adoption Convention Adoption-Related Petitions and Applications ......................................
I–800A Supplement 3 Request for Action on Approved Form I–800A ................................................................
I–817 Application for Family Unity Benefits ..........................................................................................................
I–821D Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Initial) .............................................................
I–821D Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Renewal) .......................................................
I–824 Application for Action on an Approved Application or Petition ...................................................................
I–829 Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions on Permanent Resident Status .....................................
I–881 Application for Suspension of Deportation or Special Rule Cancellation of Removal ...............................
I–910 Application for Civil Surgeon Designation ..................................................................................................
I–924 Application For Regional Center Designation Under the Immigrant Investor Program .............................
I–924A Annual Certification of Regional Center ...................................................................................................
I–929 Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U–1 Nonimmigrant .................................................................
N–300 Application to File Declaration of Intention ...............................................................................................
N–336 Request for a Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings .......................................................
N–400 Application for Naturalization .....................................................................................................................
N–470 Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization Purposes ..............................................................
N–565 Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document ..........................................................
N–600 Application for Certificate of Citizenship ...................................................................................................
N–600K Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate ..........................................................................
USCIS Immigrant Fee ...........................................................................................................................................
Biometric Services ...................................................................................................................................................
G–1041 Genealogy Index Search Request ..........................................................................................................
G–1041A Genealogy Records Request ................................................................................................................

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

VIII. Statutory and Regulatory
Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory
Planning and Review) and Executive
Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review)
Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and
13563 direct agencies to assess the costs
and benefits of available alternatives,
and if regulation is necessary, to select
regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health
and safety effects, distributive impacts,
and equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the
importance of quantifying both costs
and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This proposed rule has been
designated an ‘‘economically significant
regulatory action’’ under section 3(f)(1)
of E.O. 12866. Accordingly, the rule has
been reviewed by OMB.
USCIS’ current fee schedule is
expected to yield $3.41 billion of
average annual revenue during the FY
2019/2020 biennial period. This
represents a $0.93 billion, or 38 percent,
increase from the FY 2016/2017 fee rule
projection of $2.48 billion. See 81 FR

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

26911. The projected revenue increase
is due to higher fees as a result of the
FY 2016/2017 fee rule and more
anticipated fee-paying receipts. The FY
2016/2017 fee rule forecasted 5,870,989
total workload receipts and 5,140,415
fee-paying receipts. See 81 FR 26923–4.
However, the FY 2019/2020 fee review
forecasts 9,336,015 total workload
receipts and 7,789,861 fee-paying
receipts. This represents a 59 percent
increase to workload and 52 percent
increase to fee-paying receipt volume
assumptions.
USCIS would use the increase in
revenue under INA section 286(m), (n),
8 U.S.C. 1356(m), (n), to ensure that
USCIS would recover its full operating
costs and maintain an adequate level of
service. USCIS would set fees at levels
sufficient to cover the full cost of the
corresponding services associated with
fairly and efficiently adjudicating
immigration benefit requests and at a
level sufficient to fund overall
requirements and general operations,
including the full costs of processing
immigration benefit requests and
associated support benefits; the full cost
of providing similar benefits to asylum

PO 00000

Frm 00053

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Scenario F

805
400
985
960

770
380
965
940

515
1,130
770
715
1,615
745
480
805
400
590
500
270
495
3,900
1,800
650
17,795
4,465
1,510
1,320
1,755
1,170
1,600
545
1,015
960
200
30
240
385

485
1,130
745
695
1,600
720
445
770
380
565
480
250
475
3,895
1,785
625
17,795
4,465
1,465
1,305
1,730
1,150
1,585
515
985
940
175
30
240
385

and refugee applicants at no charge; and
the full cost of providing similar
benefits to others at no charge.
The INA provides for the collection of
fees at a level that will ensure recovery
of the full costs of providing
adjudication and naturalization
services, including services provided
without charge to asylum applicants
and certain other applicants. DHS must
fund the costs of providing services
without charge by using a portion of the
filing fees that are collected for other
immigration benefits. While most
immigration benefit request filing fees
apply to individuals, as described
above, some also apply to small entities.
USCIS seeks to minimize the impact on
all parties, but in particular small
entities. An alternative to the increased
economic burden of the proposed rule is
to maintain fees at their current level for
small entities. The strength of this
alternative is that it assures no
additional fee burden is placed on small
entities; however, this alternative also
would cause negative impacts to small
entities.
Without the fee adjustments proposed
in this rule, significant operational
changes would be necessary. Given

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62332

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

current filing volume and other
economic considerations, additional
revenue is necessary to prevent
immediate and significant cuts in
planned spending. The proposed
revenue increase is based on currently
available USCIS costs and volume
projections.
In addition to simple fee adjustments,
the proposed rule includes numerous
other changes in forms and policies
related to fee payment. Some of these

changes would result in cost savings,
and others would result in costs or
transfers. For the 10-year
implementation period of the proposed
rule, DHS estimates the total cost of the
rule to applicants/petitioners is
$4,730,732,250 undiscounted,
$4,035,410,566 discounted at 3-percent,
and $3,322,668,371 discounted at 7percent. DHS estimates the total cost
savings (benefits) to the applicants/
petitioners is $220,187,510

undiscounted, $187,824,412 discounted
at 3-percent, and $154,650,493
discounted at 7-percent. Much of this
total is expected to be transfers between
applicants and the federal government
or between groups of applicants, rather
than new, real resource costs to the U.S.
economy. These costs, transfers, and
and cost savings (benefits) are briefly
described below in Table 24, and in
more detail in Tables 47 and 48 of the
Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA).

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

TABLE 24—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PROVISIONS AND IMPACTS
Proposed provision

Description of proposed change to provision

Estimated costs or transfers of proposed provision

(a) Secure Mail Initiative ........................

USCIS has decided to implement Signature Confirmation Restricted Delivery as the sole method of delivery of
secure documents for USCIS.

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• None.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS —
• Mailing costs from USPS for
Signature Confirmation Restricted Delivery confirmation.

(b) Clarify Dishonored Fee Check Representment Requirement and Fee
Payment Method.

DHS is proposing that if a check or
other financial instrument used to
pay a fee is returned as unpayable
because of insufficient funds, USCIS
will resubmit the payment to the remitter institution one time.
In addition, DHS proposes that it may
reject a request that is accompanied
by a check that is dated more than
365 days before the receipt date.
DHS is also clarifying that fees are
non-refundable regardless of the result of the immigration benefit request or how much time the request
requires to be adjudicated. DHS is
clarifying that fees will not be refunded no matter the result of the
benefit request or how much time the
adjudication requires.

Quantitative:
Applicants• None.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• The expansion by USCIS to accept credit cards for the payment of USCIS fees has resulted in a rise in the number of
disputes filed with credit card
companies challenging the retention of the fee by USCIS. As
credit card use increases, this
result has the potential to have a
significant negative fiscal effect
on USCIS fee receipts.

(c) Eliminate $30 Returned Check Fee

DHS proposes to remove the $30
charge for dishonored payments.

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• None.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• Costs to applicants if they had to
reapply after rejection for a certain immigrant benefit.
DHS/USCIS—
• Could be an increase in insufficient payments by applicants because the $30 fee may serve as
a deterrent for submitting a deficient payment.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

PO 00000

Frm 00054

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

Estimated benefits of proposed provision
Quantitative:
Applicants—
• Applicants with unstable addresses or who move often will
be much more certain to receive
their documents.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• Signature Confirmation Restricted Delivery will verify that
the address information DHS
has for a particular immigration
benefit request is accurate.
• Reduces the likelihood of misdelivered documents that could
be misused.
Quantitative:
Applicants—
• None.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• USCIS can devote more time to
adjudicate cases and to reduce
administrative burdens and processing errors associated with fee
payments, by clarifying the dishonored fee check re-presentment.
• In the event that the bank that
issues the credit card rescinds
the payment of the fee to
USCIS, USCIS reserves the authority to invoice the responsible
party (applicant, petitioner, and
requestor) for the unpaid fee.
Quantitative:
Applicants—
• $0.33 million annual cost savings.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• The current $30 charge and the
potential of having a benefit request rejected encourage applicants to provide the correct filing
fees when submitting an application or petition.
• Applicants who submit bad
checks would no longer have to
pay a fee.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

62333

TABLE 24—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PROVISIONS AND IMPACTS—Continued
Proposed provision

Description of proposed change to provision

Estimated costs or transfers of proposed provision

(d) Fee waivers ......................................

DHS proposes to limit fee waivers to
statutorily mandated fee waivers and
to those applicants who have an annual household income of less than
125% of the FPG. Additionally, fee
waiver applicants cannot be admitted
into the United States subject to an
affidavit of support under INA section
213A, 8 U.S.C 1183a and not be
subject to the public charge inadmissibility ground under INA section
212(a)(4), 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(4).
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• Limiting fee waivers may adversely affect some applicants’
ability to apply for immigration
benefits.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• $360.1 million annually from applicable USCIS form transfer
fees.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.

(e) Fee Exemptions ...............................

DHS proposes to remove the fee exemptions for an initial request for an
employment authorization document
(EAD) for the following classifications:
• Citizen of Micronesia, Marshall
Islands, or Palau;
• Granted Withholding of Deportation;
• Temporary Protected Status
(TPS) if filing an initial TPS application for individuals under 14
years of age or over 65 years of
age.
• Applicant for Asylum and Withholding of Deportation or Removal.

(a) ...........................................................

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

(f) Changes to Biometric Services Fee

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Qualitative:
Applicants—
None.
DHS/USCIS—
• Reduce or eliminate administrative costs required to maintain
training or guidance necessary
to adjudicate unique fee waiver
requests.
Quantitative:
Applicants—
• Costs of $15.9 million annually
in filing fees to filers of Form I–
765 from the categories listed in
the proposed provision no longer
exempted.

Qualitative:
Applicants—
• This could result in lost wages
for the workers and lost productivity for the sponsoring employers. The lost wages and productivity can be considered as costs
of the forgone benefits. This
may be a very small population,
and USCIS believes they will
find some way to pay for their
EAD filing fee.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.

DHS proposes to incorporate the biometric services cost into the underlying immigration benefit request fee
instead of charging a flat $85 biometric services fee.

Jkt 250001

PO 00000

Frm 00055

Fmt 4701

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• None.

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

Estimated benefits of proposed provision
Quantitative:
Applicants—
• Cost savings of $5.6 million annually from eliminated opportunity cost of time spent completing the fee waiver request.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• None.

Qualitative:
Applicants—
• The removal of fee exemptions
for these populations may reduce further increases of other
fees to pay for these exemptions.
DHS/USCIS—
• DHS notes that the continuing to
provide these fee exemptions
would result in the costs of
those fee services being transferred to the fees for other
forms. Removing the exemptions
allows DHS to recover the costs
of adjudication of Form I–765 for
these categories from those who
benefit from the service instead
of other fee payers.
Quantitative:
Applicants—
• EOIR and TPS applicants would
save $16.0 million in cost savings resulting from a $55 reduction in biometrics service fees
per applicant.

14NOP2

62334

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 24—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PROVISIONS AND IMPACTS—Continued
Proposed provision

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

(g) Discontinue providing free interim
benefits when Forms I–75 and I–131
are filed concurrently with pending
Form I–485 or when a Form I–485 is
pending.

Description of proposed change to provision

Estimated costs or transfers of proposed provision

DHS proposes to require a $30 biometric services fee for TPS initial applications and re-registrations and
EOIR applicants.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.

Qualitative:
Applicants—
• Simplifies the process to submit
payments.
• Could result in fewer incorrect
payments and therefore, fewer
rejected applications.
• Biometric costs incorporated into
the fee would actually correspond to the services used.
DHS/USCIS—
• Eliminating the separate payment of the biometric services
fee would decrease the administrative burden required to process both a filing fee and biometric services fee for a single benefit request.
• Agency can assign a biometric
cost to the form fee that is
based on the appropriate contract instead of a standard cost.
Quantitative:
Applicants—
• $329.7 million for Forms I–765
and/or I–131 concurrently filed
with Form I–485 or while it is
pending.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.

DHS proposes to require separate fees
for Forms I–765 and/or I–131 when
filed concurrently with Form I–485 or
with a pending I–485.

(h) Form I–485 Fee for Children Under
14, Filing with Parent.

DHS proposes to require payment of
the full $1,120 proposed fee for a
child under the age of 14 years when
concurrently filing Form I–485 with a
parent.

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• Not estimated.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• $23.3 million from increased
USCIS form fees.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.

(i) Allow Individuals with Advance Parole to use Form I–131A, Application
for Travel Document (Carrier Documentation) and Expand the Population Eligible to File Form I–131A.

DHS proposes to expand the population eligible to use Form I–131A to
include requests for replacement advance parole documents

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• $4.1 million for new costs to file
Form I–131A.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

PO 00000

Frm 00056

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

Estimated benefits of proposed provision

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• Not estimated.

Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• The proposed provision would
be to isolate stand-alone interim
benefit applicants from those
concurrently filing Form I–485 allowing USCIS to more accurately assessed fee-paying percentages, fee-paying volumes,
and fees for all three benefit
types.
• Easier to administer separate
fees than to determine if the I–
131 or I–765 is supposed to be
free or require a fee
Quantitative:
Applicants—
• Not estimated.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• Easier to administer one single
fee for Form I–485 would reduce
the burden of adjudication and
better reflect the cost of adjudication.
Quantitative:
• None.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• The creation of a process for individuals to replace advance parole cards while abroad.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

62335

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

TABLE 24—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PROVISIONS AND IMPACTS—Continued
Proposed provision

Description of proposed change to provision

Estimated costs or transfers of proposed provision

(j) Separating Form I–129, Petition for a
Nonimmigrant Worker, into Different
Forms, and Limit Petitions Where
Multiple Beneficiaries are Permitted to
25 Named Beneficiaries per Petition.

DHS proposes to separate the Petition
for a Nonimmigrant Worker, Form I–
129 into several forms with different
corresponding fees. DHS also proposes to impose a limit of 25 named
beneficiaries per petition where multiple beneficiaries are permitted.

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• Annual transfer form fees, opportunity costs of time, and multiple forms limited to 25 named
beneficiaries to file Form I–129
would range depending on who
files the form.
• With the new requirements
some petitioners will now be required to file multiple petitions
because the forms are limited to
only 25 named beneficiaries.
This will require additional cost
for the petitioners to use a HR,
In-house, or Outsourced lawyer
to complete the different I–129
classifications forms, with different fees.
HR Specialist—$69.6 million; and
In-house Lawyer—$65.4 million;
or Outsourced Lawyer—$59.8
million.
DHS/USCIS—
• Not estimated.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.

(k) Extend premium processing timeframe from 15 calendar days to 15
business days.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

DHS proposes to change the premium
processing timeframe from 15 calendar days to 15 business days.

Jkt 250001

PO 00000

Frm 00057

Fmt 4701

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• Not estimated.

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

Estimated benefits of proposed provision
Quantitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.

Qualitative:
Applicants—
• Separating forms would allow
applicants to focus on each
form’s use and would reduce the
need to navigate lengthy instructions that do not apply to their
petition.
• Separating fees might prevent
future increases in fees to one
petitioner population that may be
caused by some other petitioner
population also using that form.
DHS/USCIS—
• By splitting the form and proposing several different fees,
USCIS believes it will simplify or
consolidate the information requirements for petitioners and
applicants as well as better reflect the cost to adjudicate each
specific nonimmigrant classification.
• Proposed fees would be imposed on the separate form for
each specific petitioner population that causes the adjudication costs; other petitioners filing
for other nonimmigrant classifications would not be burdened
with costs not associated with
their filings.
• Splitting the form and fees will
allow USCIS to focus the information requirements for petitioners, better reflect the cost to
adjudicate each specific nonimmigrant classification, and recover the revenue more directly
from those petitioners who are
receiving the benefit.
• Breaking out Form I–129 will affect backlogs only insofar as updating the fees enables USCIS
to achieve full cost recovery and
assign more resources to a particular adjudication as needs and
priorities dictate.
Quantitative:
Applicants—
• Not estimated. Employers could
lose some productivity but
USCIS has no way to estimate
what that loss may be.

14NOP2

62336

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 24—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PROVISIONS AND IMPACTS—Continued
Proposed provision

Description of proposed change to provision

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

(l) Creation of Form I–600A/600 Supple- DHS proposes to:
ment 3, Request for Action on ApCreate a new form, I–600 Supplement
proved For I–600A/I–600 and new fee.
3, Request for Action on an Approved Form I–600A/I–600, and fee;
clarify the regulations and align them
with current practice regarding when
prospective adoptive parents are not
required to pay the Form I–600 or
Form I–800 filing fee for multiple
Form I–600 or Form I–800 petitions;
alter the validity period for a Form I–
600A approval in an orphan case
from 18 to 15 months to remove inconsistencies between Form I–600A
approval periods and validity of the
FBI fingerprint authorization.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

PO 00000

Frm 00058

Fmt 4701

Estimated costs or transfers of proposed provision

Estimated benefits of proposed provision

Qualitative:
Petitioners—
• Increased time burden and potential costs to employers who
must plan for additional business
days while waiting for premium
processing.
• Applicants may have to wait
longer for decisions on their
cases, from 15 calendar days to
15 business days.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.

Qualitative:
Petitioners—
• Removes petitioner expectation
of 15 calendar day processing to
allow for better business planning.
DHS/USCIS—
• Reduces risk of failing to complete premium processing in the
allotted timeframe, which results
in refunds to petitioners and
possibly suspension of the premium processing service.
• Allows USCIS additional time to
process a petition. USCIS will
avoid having to issue a refund
and possibly avoid suspending
premium processing service.
Quantitative:
Applicants—
• None.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• Improve and align the adjudication and approval processes for
adoptions from countries that
are party to the Hague Adoption
Convention and countries that
are not.
• Clarify the process for applicants
who would like to request an extension of Form I–600A/I–600
and/or another type of approved
change to their application/petition.
DHS/USCIS—
• Standardizes USCIS process
and provides for the ability to
collect a fee.
• Improve and align the USCIS
adjudication and approval processes for adoptions of children
from countries that are party to
the Hague Adoption Convention
and from countries that are not.
• Changing the validity period to
15 months will make the Form I–
600A approval periods consistent with the validity of FBI biometric related background
checks. The uniform 15-month
validity period will also alleviate
the burden on prospective adoptive parents and adoption service providers to monitor multiple
expiration dates.

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• $0.57 million for new form fees.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

62337

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

TABLE 24—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PROVISIONS AND IMPACTS—Continued
Proposed provision

Description of proposed change to provision

Estimated costs or transfers of proposed provision

Estimated benefits of proposed provision

(m) Changes to Genealogy Search and
Records Requests.

DHS proposes several changes to the
USCIS genealogy program and how
the agency processes genealogy requests. DHS proposes to expand the
use of electronic genealogy requests;
change the search request process
so that USCIS may provide requesters with digital records, if they exist;
and change the genealogy fees.

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• None.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• USCIS may still need to mail
some records in cases where requestors who cannot submit the
forms electronically need to submit paper copies of both forms
with required filing fees.

(n) Remove Reduced Fee for Naturalization Applicants Using Form I–
942, Request for Reduced Fee,
When Filing Form N–400, Application
for Naturalization.

DHS proposes to eliminate the reduced
fee option for Form N–400 that applies to applicants whose documented household income is greater
than 150 percent and not more than
200 percent of the Federal poverty
level.

(o) Charge for an initial Form I–765
while an asylum claim is pending.

DHS proposes to require the fee for an
initial Application for Employment Authorization, Form I–765, when asylum applicants apply for asylum or
file an Application for Asylum and for
Withholding of Removal, Form I–589.
Currently, USCIS exempts these initial applicants with pending asylum
applications.

(p) Charge a fee for Form I–589, Application for Asylum and for Withholding
of Removal.

DHS proposes a $50 fee for Form I–
589, Application for Asylum and for
Withholding of Removal.

(q) Charge a fee for Deferred Action for
Childhood Arrivals (DACA) renewal
requestors, Form I–821D.

DHS proposes a fee for renewal Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals
(DACA). Form I–821D currently has
no fee.
DHS does not propose to introduce a
fee for Form I–821D initial DACA requests because USCIS does not currently accept such requests, except
as described in preamble above, or
plan to accept them in the future.

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• $2.9 million annually in transfer
fees to file Form N–400 for individuals who would have previously requested a reduced
Form N–400 fee using Form I–
942.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.
Quantitative:
Applicants—
• $93.1 million for applicants who
have applied for asylum or withholding of removal before EOIR
(defensive asylum) or filed Form
I–589 Application for Asylum
and for Withholding of Removal
with USCIS (affirmative asylum),
to pay the fee for initial filings of
Form I–765.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.
Quantitative:
Applicants—
• Asylum applicants would pay
$5.6 million in filing fee costs for
Form I–589.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• Some applicants may not be
able to afford this fee and would
no longer be able to apply for
asylum.
Quantitative:
• $75.3 million for renewal application Form I–821D transfer
fees.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• None.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• Genealogy search and records
request process changes would
increase efficiency and decrease
wait times for requestors.
DHS/USCIS—
• Reduce costs for mailing,
records processing, and storage
costs because electronic
versions of records requests
would reduce the administrative
burden on USCIS.
• USCIS would save $16 to $45
per index search service and
$26 to $55 for each textual file
retrieved.
• Providing digital records in response to a Form G–1041 request may reduce the number of
Form G–1041A requests that
would be filed because there
would already be a copy of the
record if it was previously
digitized.
Quantitative:
Applicants—
• None.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• Not transfer form N–400 costs to
other form fees.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

PO 00000

Frm 00059

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• None.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• Using LIFO in fiscal year 2018
completed pending cases at an
80 percent rate in the first 30
days, and 98 percent of pending
asylum cases were completed
within 60 days of receipt.
Quantitative:
Applicants—
• None.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• None.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• Costs for processing DACA renewal will be recovered from
those who receive the benefit
rather than from other fee payers.

14NOP2

62338

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 24—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PROVISIONS AND IMPACTS—Continued
Proposed provision

Description of proposed change to provision

Estimated costs or transfers of proposed provision

Estimated benefits of proposed provision

(r) Fee Combining for Form I–881, Application for Suspension of Deportation or Special Rule Cancellation of
Removal (Pursuant to Section 203 of
Public Law 105–100 [NACARA]).

DHS proposes to combine the current
multiple fees charged for an individual or family into a single fee for
each filing of Form I–881, Application
for Suspension of Deportation or
Special Rule Cancellation of Removal (Pursuant to Section 203 of
Pub. L. 105–100, the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief
Act [NACARA]).
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• $0.90 million annual costs to
apply for suspension of deportation or special rule cancellation
of removal under NACARA
using Form I–881.

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• $0.11 million in cost savings
from the reduced passport-style
photos requirement.

(a) ...........................................................

(s) Clarify who must pay a 9–11 Response and Biometric Entry-Exit Fee
for H–1B and L–1..

DHS proposes to apply the 9–11 Response and Biometric Entry-Exit Fee
to all covered petitions (meaning
those meeting the 50 employee/50
percent H–1B or L test), whether for
new employment or extension.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

DHS has prepared a full analysis
according to Executive Orders 12866
and 13563 which can be found in the
docket for this rulemaking or by
searching for RIN 1615–AC18 on
www.regulations.gov.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended by
the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,
Public Law 104–121 (Mar. 29, 1996),
requires Federal agencies to consider
the potential impact of regulations on
small entities during the development of
their rules. The term ‘‘small entities’’
refers to small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are not dominant in
their fields, and governmental
jurisdictions with populations of less
than 50,000. An ‘‘individual’’ is not
defined by the RFA as a small entity and
costs to an individual from a rule are
not considered for RFA purposes. In
addition, the courts have held that the
RFA requires an agency to perform an
initial regulatory flexibility analysis
(IRFA) of small entity impacts only
when a rule directly regulates small
entities. Consequently, any indirect

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• Combining the two IEFA fees
into a single fee will streamline
the revenue collections and reporting.
• USCIS proposing a single Form
I–881 fee may help reduce the
administrative burden on USCIS
on the small workload.
Quantitative:
Applicants—
• $186.2 million in transfer fees.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• None.
DHS/USCIS—
• None.

impacts from a rule to a small entity are
not considered as costs for RFA
purposes. Below is a summary of the
small entity analysis. A more detailed
analysis is available in the rulemaking
docket at http://www.regulations.gov.
Individuals, rather than small entities,
submit the majority of immigration and
naturalization benefit applications and
petitions. This rule would affect entities
that file and pay fees for certain
immigration benefit requests.
Consequently, there are six categories of
USCIS benefits that are subject to a RFA
analysis for this proposed rule: Petition
for a Nonimmigrant Worker, Form I–
129; Immigrant Petition for an Alien
Worker, Form I–140; Civil Surgeon
Designation, Form I–910; Petition for
Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special
Immigrant, Form I–360; Genealogy
Forms G–1041 and G–1041A, Index
Search and Records Requests; and the
Application for Regional Center
Designation Under the Immigrant
Investor Program, Form I–924.
DHS does not believe that the increase
in fees proposed in this rule would have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities that
file Forms I–129, I–140, I–910, or I–360.

PO 00000

Frm 00060

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Quantitative:
Applicants—
• None.
Qualitative:
Applicants—
• Fee would consistently be applied to all H–1B or L–1 petitions, whether for new employment or extension.
DHS/USCIS—
• The collected fees would help
increase the 9–11 Response
and Biometric Entry-Exit fee account for biometric entry-exit
screening, deficit reduction, and
other public purposes funded by
general Treasury revenues.

However, DHS does not have sufficient
data on the revenue collected through
administrative fees by regional centers
to definitively determine the economic
impact on small entities that may file
Form I–924. DHS also does not have
sufficient data on the requestors that file
genealogy forms, Forms G–1041 and G–
1041A, to determine whether such
filings were made by entities or
individuals and thus is unable to
determine if the fee increase for
genealogy searches is likely to have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
DHS is publishing this initial regulatory
flexibility analysis to aid the public in
commenting on the small entity impact
of its proposed adjustment to the USCIS
fee schedule. In particular, DHS
requests information and data that
would help to further assess the impact
on small entities in the regional centers
or on genealogy forms.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA)
1. A description of the reasons why
the action by the agency is being
considered.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
DHS proposes to adjust fees USCIS
charges for certain immigration and
naturalization benefits. DHS has
determined that current fees would not
recover the full costs of services
provided. Adjustment to the fee
schedule is necessary to recover costs
and maintain adequate service.
2. A succinct statement of the
objectives of, and legal basis for, the
proposed rule.
DHS’s objectives and legal authority
for this proposed rule are discussed in
the preamble of this rule.
3. A description and, where feasible,
an estimate of the number of small
entities to which the proposed rule
would apply.
Entities affected by this rule are those
that file and pay fees for certain
immigration benefit applications and
petitions on behalf of a foreign national.
These applications include Form I–129,
Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker;
Form I–140, Immigrant Petition for an
Alien Worker; Form I–910, Civil
Surgeon Designation; Form I–360,
Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or
Special Immigrant; Genealogy Forms G–
1041 and G–1041A, Index Search and
Records Requests; and Form I–924,
Application for Regional Center
Designation Under the Immigrant
Investor Program. Annual numeric
estimates of the small entities impacted
by this fee increase total (in
parentheses): Form I–129 (77,571
entities), Form I–140 (22,165 entities),
Form I–910 (428 entities), and Form I–
360 (698 entities).190 DHS was not able
to determine the numbers of regional
centers or genealogy requestors that
would be considered small entities,
therefore does not provide numeric
estimates for Form I–924 or Forms G–
1041 and G–1041A.191
This rule applies to small entities,
including businesses, non-profit
organizations, and governmental
jurisdictions filing for the above
benefits. Forms I–129 and I–140, would
see a number of industry clusters
impacted by this rule (see Appendix A
of the Small Entity Analysis for a list of
impacted industry codes for Forms I–

129, I–140, I–910, and I–360). The fee
for civil surgeon designation would
apply to physicians requesting such
designation. The fee for Amerasian,
widow(er), or special immigrants would
apply to any entity petitioning on behalf
of a religious worker. Finally, the Form
I–924 would impact any entity seeking
designation as a regional center under
the Immigrant Investor Program or filing
an amendment to an approved regional
center application. Captured in the
dataset for Form I–924 is also Form I–
924A, which regional centers must file
annually to establish continued
eligibility for regional center
designation for each fiscal year.
DHS does not have sufficient data on
the requestors for the genealogy forms,
Forms G–1041 and G–1041A, to
determine if entities or individuals
submitted these requests. DHS has
previously determined that requests for
historical records are usually made by
individuals. If professional genealogists
and researchers submitted such requests
in the past, they did not identify
themselves as commercial requestors
and thus could not be segregated in the
data. Genealogists typically advise
clients on how to submit their own
requests. For those that submit requests
on behalf of clients, DHS does not know
the extent to which they can pass along
the fee increases to their individual
clients. Therefore, DHS does not
currently have sufficient data to
definitively assess the estimate of small
entities for these requests.
a. Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker,
Form I–129
DHS proposes to adjust the fee for
Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker,
Form I–129, from $460 to various fees.
Currently, employers may use Form I–
129, to petition for H–1B, H–2A, H–2B,
H–3, L–1, O–1, O–2, P–1, P–1S, P–2, P–
2S, P–3, P–3S, Q–1, or R–1
nonimmigrant workers. As applicable,
employers also may use Form I–129 to
apply for E–1, E–2, E–3, or TN
nonimmigrant status for eligible
workers. DHS proposes to separate the

62339

Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker,
Form I–129, into several forms. These
forms would include information from
the various supplemental forms for
specific types of workers. DHS proposes
different fees for these new forms. The
proposed fees are calculated at a more
detailed level than the current fees.
The current fee for Form I–129 is
$460. DHS proposes the following fees
for new Forms I–129 (separated into
new forms by worker type):
• Form I–129H1, Petition for
Nonimmigrant Worker: H–1
Classifications—$560
• Form I–129H2A, Petition for
Nonimmigrant Worker: H–2A
Classification (Named Beneficiaries)—
$860
• Form I–129H2B, Petition for
Nonimmigrant Worker: H–2B
Classification (Named Beneficiaries)—
$725
• Form I–129L, Petition for
Nonimmigrant Worker: L Classifications
(Named Beneficiaries)—$815
• Form I–129O, Petition for
Nonimmigrant Worker: O
Classifications—$715
• Forms Form I–129CW, Petition for
a CNMI-Only Nonimmigrant
Transitional Worker; I–129E&TN,
Application for Nonimmigrant Worker:
E and TN Classifications; and I–
129MISC, Petition for Nonimmigrant
Worker: H–3, P, Q, or R Classification—
$705
• Form I–129H2A, Petition for
Nonimmigrant Work Classification: H–
2A Classification (Unnamed
Beneficiaries)—$425
• Form I–129H2B, Petition for
Nonimmigrant Worker: H–2B
Classification (Unnamed
Beneficiaries)—$395.
For petitioners filing Form I–129 for
H–2A and H–2B workers with only
unnamed beneficiaries, DHS proposes a
lower fee than the current filing fee.
DHS proposes to increase the fee when
filed for all other worker types. The fee
adjustments and percentage increases or
decreases are summarized in Table 25.

TABLE 25—USCIS PROPOSED FEES FOR SEPARATED FORMS I–129 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019/2020

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Immigration benefit request
Form
Form
Form
Form

Current fee

I–129H1—Named Beneficiaries .............................................................
I–129H2A—Named Beneficiaries ...........................................................
I–129H2A—Unnamed Beneficiaries .......................................................
I–129H2B—Named Beneficiaries ...........................................................

190 Calculation: 90,726 Form I–129 * 85.5 percent
= 77,571 small entities; 30,321 Form I–140 * 73.1
percent = 22,165 small entities; 476 Form I–910 *

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

$460
460
460
460

90.0 percent = 428 small entities; 760 Form I–360
* 91.9 percent = 698 small entities.
191 Small entity estimates are calculated by
multiplying the population (total annual receipts

PO 00000

Frm 00061

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Proposed fee
$560
860
425
725

Difference fee
increase/
decrease
$100
400
¥35
265

Percent
change
22
87
¥8
58

for the USCIS form) by the percentage of small
entities, which are presented in subsequent sections
of this analysis.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62340

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 25—USCIS PROPOSED FEES FOR SEPARATED FORMS I–129 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019/2020—Continued
Immigration benefit request

Current fee

Form I–129H2B—Unnamed Beneficiaries .......................................................
Form I–129O ....................................................................................................
Form I–129 L1A/L1B/LZ Blanket .....................................................................
Forms I–129CW, I–129E&TN, and I–129MISC ...............................................

Proposed fee

460
460
460
460

Difference fee
increase/
decrease
¥65
255
355
245

395
715
815
705

Percent
change
¥14
55
77
53

Source: USCIS FY 2019/2020 Proposed Fee Schedule (see preamble).

Using a 12-month period of data on
the number of Form I–129 petitions
filed from October 1, 2016 to September
31, 2017, DHS collected internal data for
each filing organization including the
name, Employer Identification Number
(EIN), city, state, zip code, and number/
type of filings. Each entity may make
multiple filings. For instance, there
were receipts for 530,442 Form I–129
petitions, but only 90,726 unique
entities that filed those petitions. Since
the filing statistics do not contain
information such as the revenue of the
business, DHS used third party sources
of data to collect this information. DHS
used a subscription-based, online
database—Hoover’s—as well as three
open-access databases—Manta, Cortera,
and Guidestar—to help determine an
organization’s small entity status and
then applied Small Business
Administration size standards to the
entities under examination.192
The method DHS used to conduct the
small entity analysis was based on a
representative sample of the impacted
population with respect to each form.
To identify a representative sample,
DHS used a standard statistical formula
to determine a minimum sample size of
384 entities, which included using a 95
percent confidence level and a 5 percent
confidence interval for a population of
90,726 unique entities filing Form I–129
petitions. Based on previous experience

conducting small entity analyses, DHS
expects to find 40 to 50 percent of the
filing organizations in the online
subscription and public databases.
Accordingly, DHS selected a sample
size that was approximately 69 percent
larger than the necessary minimum to
allow for non-matches (filing entities
that could not be found in any of the
four databases). Therefore, DHS
conducted searches on 650 randomly
selected entities from a population of
90,726 unique entities that filed Form I–
129 petitions.
Of the 650 searches for small entities
that filed Form I–129 petitions, 473
searches returned a successful match of
a filing entity’s name in one of the
databases and 177 searches did not
match a filing entity. Based on previous
experience conducting regulatory
flexibility analyses, DHS assumes filing
entities not found in the online database
are likely to be small entities. As a
result, in order to prevent
underestimating the number of small
entities this rule would affect, DHS
conservatively considers all of the nonmatched entities as small entities for the
purpose of this analysis. Among the 473
matches for Form I–129, DHS
determined 346 to be small entities
based on revenue or employee count
and according to their assigned North
American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) code. Therefore, DHS

was able to classify 556 of 650 entities
as small entities that filed Form I–129
petitions, including combined nonmatches (177), matches missing data
(33), and small entity matches (346).
Using the subscription-based, online
databases mentioned above (Hoover’s,
Manta, Cortera, and Guidestar), the 33
matches missing data found in the
databases lacked applicable revenue or
employee count data.
DHS determined that 556 of 650 (85.5
percent) of the entities filing Form I–129
petitions were small entities.
Furthermore, DHS determined that 346
of the 650 entities searched were small
entities based on sales revenue data,
which were needed to estimate the
economic impact of the proposed rule.
Since these 346 small entities were a
subset of the random sample of 650
entity searches, they were statistically
significant in the context of this
research. In order to calculate the
economic impact of this rule, DHS
estimated the total costs associated with
the proposed fee increase for each entity
and divided that amount by the sales
revenue of that entity.193 Based on the
proposed fee increases for Form I–129,
DHS calculated the average economic
impact on the 346 small entities with
revenue data as summarized in Table
26.

TABLE 26—ECONOMIC IMPACTS ON SMALL ENTITIES WITH REVENUE DATA
Fee increase/
decrease

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Immigration benefit request
Form I–129H1 ..........................................................................................................................................................
Form I–129H2A—Named Beneficiaries ..................................................................................................................
Form I–129H2A—Unnamed Beneficiaries ..............................................................................................................
Form I–129H2B—Named Beneficiaries ..................................................................................................................
Form I–129H2B—Unnamed Beneficiaries ..............................................................................................................
Form I–129L ............................................................................................................................................................
Form I–129O ............................................................................................................................................................
Forms I–129CW, I–129E&TN, and I–129MISC ......................................................................................................
Source: USCIS calculation.
192 U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of
Advocacy, Size Standards Table. Available at
https://www.sba.gov/document/support--table-sizestandards.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

193 Total Economic Impact to Entity = (Number of
Petitions Submitted per Entity * $X difference in
current fee from proposed fee)/Entity Sales
Revenue.

PO 00000

Frm 00062

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

$100
400
¥35
265
¥65
355
255
245

Average
impact
percentage
0.16
0.65
¥0.06
0.43
¥0.10
0.57
0.41
0.40

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Among the 346 small entities with
reported revenue data, each one would
experience an economic impact of less
than 2 percent with the exception of 11
entities for any immigration benefit
request using separate Forms I–129.
Depending on the type of immigration
benefit request, the average impact on
all 346 small entities with revenue data
ranges from ¥0.10 to 0.65 percent, as
shown in the supporting comprehensive
small entity analysis. Therefore, the
average economic impact on the
described 346 small entities is less than
1 percent, regardless of which newly
separate Form I–129 petition is
applicable. As a result, the additional
fees this rulemaking proposes do not
represent a significant economic impact
on these small entities.
b. Immigrant Petition for an Alien
Worker, Form I–140
USCIS proposes to decrease the fee to
file Immigrant Petition for an Alien
Worker, Form I–140, from $700 to $545,
a decrease of $155 (22 percent). Using
a 12-month period of data on the
number of Form I–140 petitions filed
from October 1, 2016 to September 31,
2017, DHS collected internal data
similar to that of Form I–129. The total
number of Form I–140 petitions was
139,439, with 30,321 unique entities
that filed petitions. DHS used the same
databases previously mentioned to
search for information on revenue and
employee count.
DHS used the same method as with
Form I–129 to conduct the small entity
analysis based on a representative
sample of the impacted population. To
identify a representative sample, DHS
used a standard statistical formula to
determine a minimum sample size of
383 entities, which included using a 95
percent confidence level and a 5 percent
confidence interval on a population of
30,321 unique entities for Form I–140
petitions. Based on previous experience
conducting small entity analyses, DHS
expected to find 40 to 50 percent of the
filing organizations in the online
subscription and public databases.
Accordingly, DHS selected a sample
size that was approximately 44 percent
larger than the necessary minimum to
allow for non-matches (filing entities
that could not be found in any of the
four databases). Therefore, DHS
conducted searches on 550 randomly
selected entities from a population of
30,321 unique entities that filed Form I–
140 petitions.
Of the 550 searches for small entities
that filed Form I–140 petitions, 480
searches successfully matched the name
of the filing entity to names in the
databases and 70 searches did not match

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

the name of a filing entity. Based on
previous experience conducting
regulatory flexibility analyses, DHS
assumes filing entities not found in the
online databases are likely to be small
entities. As a result, in order to prevent
underestimating the number of small
entities this rule would affect, DHS
conservatively considers all of the nonmatched entities as small entities for the
purpose of this analysis. Among the 480
matches for Form I–140, DHS
determined 324 to be small entities
based on revenue or employee count
and according to their NAICS code.
Therefore, DHS was able to classify 402
of 550 entities as small entities that filed
Form I–140 petitions, including
combined non-matches (70), matches
missing data (8), and small entity
matches (324). Using the subscriptionbased, online databases mentioned
above (Hoover’s, Manta, Cortera, and
Guidestar), the 8 matches missing data
that were found in the databases lacked
applicable revenue or employee count
statistics.
DHS determined that 402 out of 550
(73.1 percent) entities filing Form I–140
petitions were small entities.
Furthermore, DHS determined that 324
of the 550 searched were small entities
based on sales revenue data, which were
needed to estimate the economic impact
of the proposed rule. Since these 324
were a small entity subset of the random
sample of 550 entity searches, they were
considered statistically significant in the
context of this research. Similar to Form
I–129, DHS calculated the economic
impact of this rule on entities that filed
Form I–140 by estimating the total cost
savings associated with the proposed fee
decrease for each entity and divided
that amount by sales revenue of that
entity.
Among the 324 small entities with
reported revenue data, each would
experience an economic impact of less
than ¥2 percent. Using the above
methodology, the greatest economic
impact proposed by this fee change
totaled ¥1.86 percent and the smallest
totaled ¥0.0000001 percent. The
average impact on all 324 small entities
with revenue data was ¥0.07 percent.
Because of the fee decrease, these small
entities would see a cost savings per
application in filing fees based on
petitions. The negative number
represents cost savings to the petitioner.
Therefore, the larger it is, the greater the
cost savings for the petitioners. The
average impact on all 324 small entities
with revenue data was ¥0.07 percent.
The evidence suggests that the
decreased fee proposed by this rule does
not represent a significant economic
impact on these entities.

PO 00000

Frm 00063

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62341

In addition to the individual Form I–
129 and Form I–140 analyses, USCIS
analyzed any cumulative impacts of
these form types to determine if there
were any impacts to small entities when
analyzed together. USCIS isolated those
entities that overlapped in both samples
of Forms I–129 and I–140 by EIN. Only
1 entity had an EIN that overlapped in
both samples; this was a small entity
that submitted 3 Form I–129 petitions
and 1 Form I–140 petition. Due to little
overlap in entities in the samples and
the relatively minor impacts on revenue
of fee increases of Forms I–129 and I–
140, USCIS does not expect the
combined impact of these two forms to
be an economically significant burden
on a substantial number of small
entities.
c. Civil Surgeon Designation, Form I–
910
DHS proposes to decrease the fee for
Civil Surgeon Designations, Form I–910,
from $785 to $650, a decrease of $135
(17 percent). Using a 12-month period of
data from October 1, 2016 to September
31, 2017, DHS collected internal data on
filings of Form I–910. The total number
of Form I–910 petitions was 757, with
476 unique entities that filed
applications. The third party databases
mentioned previously were used again
to search for revenue and employee
count information.
Using the same methodology as the
Forms I–129 and I–140, USCIS
conducted the small entity analysis
based on a representative sample of the
impacted population. To identify a
representative sample, DHS used a
standard statistical formula to determine
a minimum sample size of 213 entities,
which included using a 95 percent
confidence level and a 5 percent
confidence interval on a population of
476 unique entities for Form I–910.
USCIS conducted searches on 300
randomly selected entities from a
population of 476 unique entities for
Form I–910 petitions, a sample size
approximately 40 percent larger than
the minimum necessary.
Of the 300 searches for small entities
that filed Form I–910 petitions, 266
searches successfully matched the name
of the filing entity to names in the
databases and 34 searches did not match
the name of a filing entity. DHS assumes
filing entities not found in the online
databases are likely to be small entities.
DHS also assumes all of the nonmatched entities as small entities for the
purpose of this analysis. Among the 266
matches for Form I–910, DHS
determined 189 to be small entities
based on their revenue or employee
count and according to their NAICS

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62342

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

code. Therefore, DHS was able to
classify 270 of 300 entities as small
entities that filed Form I–910 petitions,
including combined non-matches (34),
matches missing data (47), and small
entity matches (189). DHS also used the
subscription-based, online databases
mentioned above (Hoover’s, Manta,
Cortera, and Guidestar), and the 8
matches missing data that were found in
the databases lacked revenue or
employee count statistics.
DHS determined that 270 out of 300
(90 percent) entities filing Form I–910
applications were small entities.
Furthermore, DHS determined that 189
of the 300 entities searched were small
entities based on sales revenue data,
which were needed in order to estimate
the economic impact of the proposed
rule. Since these 189 were a small entity
subset of the random sample of 300
entity searches, they were statistically
significant in the context of this
research.
Similar to the Forms I–129 and I–140,
DHS calculated the economic impact of
this rule on entities that filed Form I–
910 by estimating estimated the total
savings associated with the proposed fee
decrease for each entity and divided
that amount by sales revenue of that
entity. Among the 189 small entities
with reported revenue data, all
experienced an economic impact
considerably less than 1.0 percent. The
greatest economic impact imposed by
this proposed fee change totaled ¥1.350
percent and the smallest totaled ¥0.001
percent. The average impact on all 189
small entities with revenue data was
¥1.104 percent. The decreased fee will
create cost savings for the individual
applicant of $135. The negative number
represents cost savings to the applicant.
Therefore, the larger it is, the greater the
cost savings for the applicants. The
evidence suggests that the decreased fee
proposed by this rule does not represent
a significant economic impact on these
entities.
d. Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or
Special Immigrant, Form I–360
DHS proposes to increase the fee for
foreign religious workers who file using
Form I–360 from $435 to $455, an
increase of $20 (5 percent). Using a 12month period of data on the number of
Form I–360 petitions filed from October
1, 2016 to September 31, 2017, DHS
collected internal data on filings of
Form I–360 for religious workers. The
total number of Form I–360 petitions
was 2,446, with 760 unique entities that
filed petitions. DHS used the same
databases mentioned previously to
search for information on revenue and
employee count.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

DHS used the same method as with
Forms I–129 and I–140 to conduct the
small entity analysis based on a
representative sample of the impacted
population. To identify a representative
sample, DHS used a standard statistical
formula to determine a minimum
sample size of 332 entities, which
included using with a 95 percent
confidence level and a 5 percent
confidence interval on a population of
760 unique entities for Form I–360
petitions. To account for missing
organizations in the online subscription
and public databases, DHS selected a
sample size that was approximately 27
percent larger than the necessary
minimum to allow for non-matches
(filing entities that could not be found
in any of the four databases). Therefore,
DHS conducted searches on 420
randomly selected entities from a
population of 760 unique entities that
filed Form I–360 petitions.
Of the 420 searches for small entities
that filed Form I–360 petitions, 417
searches successfully matched the name
of the filing entity to names in the
databases and 3 searches did not match
the name of the filing entities in the
databases. DHS assumes that filing
entities not found in the online
databases are likely to be small entities.
As a result, in order to prevent
underestimating the number of small
entities this rule would affect, DHS
conservatively assumes to consider all
of the non-matched entities as small
entities for the purpose of this analysis.
Among the 417 matches for Form I–360,
DHS determined 309 to be small entities
based on revenue or employee count
and according to their NAICS code.
Therefore, DHS was able to classify 386
of 420 entities as small entities that filed
Form I–360 petitions, including
combined non-matches (3), matches
missing data (74), and small entity
matches (309). DHS also used the
subscription-based, online databases
mentioned above (Hoover’s, Manta,
Cortera, and Guidestar), the 74 matches
missing data that were found in the
databases lacked revenue or employee
count data.
DHS determined that 386 out of 420
(91.9 percent) entities filing Form I–360
petitions were small entities.
Furthermore, DHS determined that 309
of the 420 searched were small entities
based on sales revenue data, which were
needed to estimate the economic impact
of the proposed rule. Since 309 small
entities were a subset of the random
sample of 420 entity searches, they were
statistically significant in the context of
this research.
Similar to other forms analyzed in
this RFA, DHS calculated the economic

PO 00000

Frm 00064

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

impact of this rule on entities that filed
Form I–360 by estimating the total costs
associated with the proposed fee
increase for each entity. Among the 309
small entities with reported revenue
data, each would experience an
economic impact of less than 1.0
percent. The greatest economic impact
imposed by this proposed fee change
totaled 0.46 percent and the smallest
totaled 0.000002 percent. The average
impact on all 309 small entities with
revenue data was 0.02 percent.
DHS also analyzed the proposed costs
by this rule on the petitioning entities
relative to the costs of the typical
employee’s salary. Guidelines suggested
by the SBA Office of Advocacy indicate
that the impact of a rule could be
significant if the cost of the regulation
exceeds 5 percent of the labor costs of
the entities in the sector.194 According
to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS),
the mean annual salary is $53,290 for
clergy,195 $46,980 for directors of
religious activities and education,196
and $35,860 for other religious
workers.197 Based on an average of 1.5
religious workers198 petitioned-for per
entity, the additional average annual
cost would be $30 per entity.199 The
additional costs per entity proposed by
this rule represent only 0.06 percent of
the average annual salary for clergy,
0.06 percent of the average annual
salary for directors of religious activities
and education, and 0.08 percent of the
average annual salary for all other
religious workers.200 Therefore, using
194 Office of Advocacy, Small Business
Administration, ‘‘A Guide for Government
Agencies, How to Comply with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act’’, page 19: https://www.sba.gov/sites/
default/files/advocacy/How-to-Comply-with-theRFA-WEB.pdf
195 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of
Labor, ‘‘Occupational Employment Statistics, May
2018, ‘‘Clergy’’: https://www.bls.gov/oes/2018/may/
oes212011.htm (viewed September 24, 2019).
196 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of
Labor, ‘‘Occupational Employment Statistics, May
2018, ‘‘Directors of Religious Activities and
Education’’: https://www.bls.gov/oes/2018/may/
oes212099.htm (viewed September 24, 2019).
197 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of
Labor, ‘‘Occupational Employment Statistics, May
2018, ‘‘Religious Workers, All Other’’: https://
www.bls.gov/oes/2018/may/oes212099.htm (viewed
September 24, 2019).
198 USCIS calculated the average filing per entity
of 1.5 petitions, from the Form I–360 Sample with
Petition Totals in Appendix E, of the Small Entity
Analysis for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services Fee Schedule NPRM. Calculation: (total
number of petitions from each sample id)/(total
number of sample Form I–360 petitions) = 618/420
= 1.5 average petitions filed per entity.
199 Calculation: 1.5 average petitions per entity *
$20 increase in petition fees = $30 additional total
cost per entity.
200 Calculation: $30 per entity/$53,290 clergy
salary × 100 = .06 percent;
$30 per entity/$46,980 directors of religious
activities and education × 100 = .06 percent;

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

average annual labor cost guidelines, the
additional regulatory compliance costs
proposed by this rule are not significant.
e. Genealogy Requests—Genealogy
Index Search Request Form G–1041 and
Genealogy Record Request, Form G–
1041A
DHS proposes fee increases to file
both types of genealogy requests: Form
G–1041, Genealogy Index Search
Request and Form G–1041A, Genealogy
Record Request. The fee to file Form G–
1041 would increase from $65 to $240,
an increase of $175 (269 percent
increase). The fee for Form G–1041A
would increase from $65 to $385, an
increase of $320 (492 percent). Based on
DHS records for calendar years 2013 to
2017, there was an annual average of
3,840 genealogy index search requests
made using Form G–1041 and there was
an annual average of 2,152 genealogy
records requests made using Form G–
1041A. DHS does not have sufficient
data on the requestors for the genealogy
forms to determine if entities or
individuals submitted these requests.
DHS has previously determined that
individuals usually make requests for
historical records.201 If professional
genealogists and researchers submitted
such requests in the past, they did not
identify themselves as commercial
requestors and, therefore, DHS could
not separate these data from the dataset.
Genealogists typically advise clients on
how to submit their own requests. For
those that submit requests on behalf of
clients, DHS does not know the extent
to which they can pass along the fee
increases to their individual clients.
Therefore, DHS currently does not have
sufficient data to definitively assess the
impact on small entities for these
requests.
However, DHS must still recover the
full costs of this program. As stated in
the preamble to this proposed rule,
reducing the filing fee for any one
benefit request submitted to DHS simply
transfers the additional cost to process
this request to other immigration and
naturalization filing fees.
For this proposed fee rule, DHS
proposes to expand the use of electronic
genealogy requests to encourage
requesters to use the electronic versions
of Form G–1041 and Form G–1041A.
DHS also proposes to change the search
request process so that USCIS may
provide requesters with electronic
records, if they exist, in response to the
$30 per entity/$35,860 other religious workers ×
100 = .08 percent.
201 See ‘‘Establishment of a Genealogy Program;
Proposed Rule,’’71 FR 20357 (April 20, 2006).
Available at: https://www.regulations.gov/
document?D=USCIS-2006-0013-0001.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

62343

initial index request. These proposed
changes may reduce the time it takes to
request and receive genealogy records
and, in some cases, it would eliminate
the need to make multiple search
requests and submit separate fees.
Moreover, DHS notes that providing
digital records in response to a Form G–
1041 request may reduce the number of
Form G–1041A requests that would be
filed because there would already be a
copy of the record if it was previously
digitized. As a result, the volume of
Form G–1041A requests USCIS receives
may decrease, though DHS is unable to
estimate by how much. DHS requests
comments from the public on the
impacts to small entities of the proposed
fee increases to the genealogy forms.

Center Program, foreign nationals base
their EB–5 petitions on investments in
new commercial enterprises located
within USCIS-designated ‘‘regional
centers.’’ DHS regulations define a
regional center as an economic unit,
public or private, that promotes
economic growth, including increased
export sales, improved regional
productivity, job creation, and increased
domestic capital investment. See 8 CFR
204.6(e). While all EB–5 petitioners go
through the same petition process, those
petitioners participating in the Regional
Center Program may meet statutory job
creation requirements based on
economic projections of either direct or
indirect job creation, rather than only on
jobs directly created by the new
commercial enterprise. See 8 CFR
f. Regional Center Under the Immigrant
204.6(j)(4)(iii), (m)(3). As of August 12,
Investor Program, Form I–924 and I–
2019, there were 826 USCIS-approved
924A
regional centers.204 Requests for
As part of the Immigration Act of
regional center designation must be
1990, Public Law 101–649, 104 Stat.
filed with USCIS on Form I–924,
4978, Congress established the EB–5
Application for Regional Center
immigrant visa classification to
Designation Under the Immigrant
incentivize employment creation in the
Investor Program. See 8 CFR
United States. Under the EB–5 program, 204.6(m)(3)–(4). Once designated,
lawful permanent resident (LPR) status
regional centers must provide USCIS
is available to foreign nationals who
with updated information to
invest the required amount in a new
demonstrate continued eligibility for the
commercial enterprise that will create at designation by submitting a Form I–
least 10 full-time jobs in the United
924A, Annual Certification of Regional
States. See INA sec. 203(b)(5), 8 U.S.C.
Center, on an annual basis or as
1153(b)(5). A foreign national may also
otherwise requested. See 8 CFR
invest a lower amount in a targeted
204.6(m)(6)(i)(B).
employment area defined to include
DHS proposes no adjustment to the
rural areas and areas of high
fee for the Application for Regional
unemployment. Id.; 8 CFR 204.6(f). The Center Designation Under the Immigrant
INA allots 9,940 immigrant visas each
Investor Program, Form I–924. The
fiscal year for foreign nationals seeking
current fee to file Form I–924 is $17,795.
to enter the United States under the EB– However, DHS is proposing to increase
5 classification.202 See INA sec. 201(d), 8 the fee for the Annual Certification of
U.S.C. 1151(d); INA sec. 203(b)(5), 8
Regional Center, Form I–924A, from
U.S.C. 1153(b)(5). Not less than 3,000 of $3,035 to $4,470 per filing, an increase
these visas must be reserved for foreign
of $1,435 (47 percent). Using a 12nationals investing in targeted
month period of data on the number of
employment areas. See INA sec.
Forms I–924 and I–924A from October
203(b)(5)(B), 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(5)(B).
1, 2016 to September 31, 2017, DHS
Enacted in 1992, section 610 of the
collected internal data on these forms.
Departments of Commerce, Justice, and
DHS received a total of 280 Form I–924
State, the Judiciary, and Related
applications and 847 Form I–924A
Agencies Appropriations Act, 1993,
applications.
Public Law 102–395, 106 Stat. 1828,
Regional centers are difficult to assess
established a pilot program that requires because there is a lack of official data on
the allocation of a limited number of
employment, income, and industry
EB–5 immigrant visas to individuals
classification for these entities. It is
who invest through DHS-designated
difficult to determine the small entity
regional centers.203 Under the Regional
status of regional centers without such
data. Such a determination is also
202 An immigrant investor, his or her spouse, and
difficult because regional centers can be
children (if any) will each use a separate visa
structured in a variety of different ways
number.
203 Current law requires that DHS annually set
aside 3,000 EB–5 immigrant visas for regional
center investors. Public Law 105–119, sec. 116, 111
Stat. 2440 (Nov. 26, 1997). If this full annual
allocation is not used, remaining visas may be
allocated to foreign nationals who do not invest in
regional centers.

PO 00000

Frm 00065

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

204 USCIS Immigrant Investor Regional Centers:
https://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/
permanent-workers/employment-basedimmigration-fifth-preference-eb-5/immigrantinvestor-regional-centers (last reviewed/updated
Aug. 20, 2019).

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62344

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

and can involve multiple business and
financial activities, some of which may
play a direct or indirect role in linking
investor funds to new commercial
enterprises and job-creating projects or
entities. The information provided by
regional centers as part of the Forms I–
924 and I–924A does not include
adequate data to allow DHS to reliably
identify the small entity status of
individual applicants. Although
regional center applicants typically
report the NAICS codes associated with
the sectors they plan to direct investor
funds toward, these codes do not
necessarily apply to the regional centers
themselves. In addition, information
provided to DHS concerning regional
centers generally does not include
regional center revenues or
employment.
DHS was able to obtain some
information under some specific
assumptions in an attempt to analyze
the small entity status of regional
centers.205 In the DHS final rule ‘‘EB–5
Immigrant Investor Program
Modernization,’’ DHS analyzed
estimated administrative fees and
revenue amounts for regional centers.
DHS found both the mean and median
for administrative fees to be $50,000 and
the median revenue amount to be
$1,250,000 over the period fiscal years
2014 to 2017. DHS does not know the
extent to which these regional centers
can pass along the fee increases to the

individual investors. Passing along the
costs from this rule could reduce or
eliminate the economic impacts to the
regional centers. While DHS cannot
definitively claim there is no significant
economic impact to these small entities
based on existing information, DHS
would assume existing regional centers
with revenues equal to or less than
$447,000 per year (some of which DHS
assumes would be derived from
administrative fees charged to
individual investors) could experience a
significant economic impact. If DHS
assumes a fee increase that represents 1
percent of annual revenue is a
‘‘significant’’ economic burden under
the RFA.206 DHS welcomes comments
from the public on the impacts to small
entities of the proposed fee increases to
Form I–924A and requests information
from the public on data sources on the
average revenues collected by regional
centers in the form of administrative
fees and the extent to which regional
centers may pass along the fee increases
to the individual investors.
g. Other Possible Fee Scenarios
As discussed earlier in the preamble,
the fees that DHS proposes may change
in a final rule based on policy decisions,
in response to public comments,
intervening legislation, and other
changes. Other than fee adjustments
made in response to public comments
and policy modifications, DHS notes

that the fee adjustments in a final rule
depend on two factors beyond its
control. As previously described in the
preamble, this rule includes proposed
DACA fees associated with Form I–
821D. However, DHS is currently
operating under two nationwide
preliminary injunctions to maintain the
DACA policy. Additionally, the
proposed fees are based on IEFA
funding $207.6 million of ICE expenses.
If DHS does not obtain relief from the
DACA preliminary injunctions,
Congress rejects the proposal to fund
these ICE expenses with IEFA funding,
or DHS does not ultimately shift the
aforementioned ICE costs from annual
appropriations to the IEFA, then fees for
most of the forms analyzed in this IRFA
would also change.
Table 27 shows the current and
proposed fees for the forms analyzed in
this IRFA according to each fee
schedule scenario based on the two
factors mentioned above. Scenario A
refers to the proposed fees described in
detail throughout this rule. Scenario B
includes DACA fees, but excludes the
ICE transfer. Scenario C excludes DACA
fees, but includes the ICE transfer.
Scenario D excludes both DACA fees
and the ICE transfer. Scenario E and F
includes separate initial and renewal
fees for DACA fees; scenario E includes
the ICE transfer, but F excludes the ICE
transfer.

TABLE 28—PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE BY SCENARIO WITH FORMS AFFECTING SMALL ENTITIES, INITIAL REGULATORY
FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS
Immigration benefit request
I–129 Petition for a Nonimmigrant worker ..........................................................................................
I–129H1 ........................................................................................................................................
I–129H2A—Named Beneficiaries ................................................................................................
I–129H2B—Named Beneficiaries ................................................................................................
I–129L ..........................................................................................................................................
I–129O ..........................................................................................................................................
I–129CW, I–129E&TN, and I–129MISC ......................................................................................
I–129H2A—Unnamed Beneficiaries ............................................................................................
I–129H2B—Unnamed Beneficiaries ............................................................................................
I–140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker ..........................................................................................
I–360 Petition for Amerasian Widow(er) or Special Immigrant ..........................................................
I–910 Application for Civil Surgeon Designation ................................................................................
I–924 Application for Regional Center Designation Under the Immigrant Investor Program ............
I–924A Annual Certification of Regional Center .................................................................................
G–1041 Genealogy Index Search Request ........................................................................................
G–1041A Genealogy Records Request ..............................................................................................

Current fee

Scenario A

Scenario B

Scenario C

Scenario D

Scenario E

Scenario F

$460
460
460
460
460
460
460
460
460
700
435
785
17,795
3,035
65
65

$N/A
560
860
725
815
715
705
425
395
545
455
650
17,795
4,470
240
385

$N/A
535
840
700
795
690
685
400
370
520
435
625
17,795
4,470
240
385

$N/A
585
870
735
830
725
720
440
410
580
475
660
17,795
4,465
240
385

$N/A
555
850
710
805
705
695
410
385
555
450
635
17,795
4,460
240
385

$N/A
550
810
705
790
695
680
405
390
545
455
650
17,795
4,465
240
385

$N/A
520
790
685
770
670
660
385
365
520
430
625
17,795
4,465
240
385

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Source: USCIS analysis.

205 The methodology used to analyze the small
entity status of regional centers is explained in
further detail in Section D of the RFA section

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

within DHS final rule ‘‘EB–5 Immigrant Investor
Program Modernization,’’ available at 84 FR 35750.

PO 00000

Frm 00066

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

206 Calculation: 1 percent of $447,000 = $4,470
(the new fee for Form I–924A).

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62345

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Further, tables 28 and 29 show the
estimated economic impact on small
entities based on the fee schedule

proposed for each of the fee scenarios.
DHS followed the same method as
previously described in this IRFA to

estimate the economic impact on small
entities for each fee scenario, A—F.

TABLE 29—ESTIMATED ECONOMIC IMPACT ON SMALL ENTITIES FOR PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE BY SCENARIO (A–D),
RFA INITIAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS
Scenario A
Increase/
decrease
from
current
fee

Immigration benefit request

I–129 Petition for a Nonimmigrant worker ........................
I–129H1B ...................................................................
I–129H2A—Named Beneficiaries ..............................
I–129H2B—Named Beneficiaries ..............................
I–129L ........................................................................
I–129O .......................................................................
Form I–129CW, I–129E&TN, and I–129MISC ..........
I–129H2A—Unnamed Beneficiaries ..........................
I–129H2B—Unnamed Beneficiaries ..........................
I–140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker ........................
I–360 Petition for Amerasian Widow(er) or Special Immigrant ...............................................................................
I–910 Application for Civil Surgeon Designation ..............
I–924 Application For Regional Center Designation
Under the Immigrant Investor Program .........................
I–924A Annual Certification of Regional Center ...............
G–1041 Genealogy Index Search Request ......................
G–1041A Genealogy Records Request ...........................

Scenario B
Increase/
decrease
from
current
fee

Average
economic
impact
percent

Scenario C
Increase/
decrease
from
current
fee

Average
economic
impact
percent

Scenario D

Average
economic
impact
percent

Increase/
decrease
from
current
fee

Average
economic
impact
percent

N/A
$100
400
265
355
255
245
¥35
¥65
¥155

N/A
0.22
0.87
0.58
0.77
0.55
0.53
¥0.08
¥0.14
¥0.221

N/A
$75
380
240
335
230
225
¥60
¥90
¥180

N/A
0.16
0.83
0.52
0.73
0.50
0.49
¥0.13
¥020
¥0.257

N/A
$125
410
275
370
265
260
¥20
¥50
¥120

N/A
0.27
0.89
0.60
0.80
0.58
0.57
¥0.043
¥0.11
¥0.171

N/A
$95
390
250
345
245
235
¥50
¥75
¥145

N/A
0.21
0.85
0.54
0.75
0.53
0.51
¥0.11
¥0.16
¥0.207

20
¥135

0.05
¥0.17

0
¥160

N/A
¥0.20

40
¥125

0.0919
¥0.16

15
¥150

0.034
¥0.19

0
1,435
175
320

N/A
0.47
2.69
4.92

0
1,435
175
320

N/A
0.47
2.69
4.92

0
1,430
175
320

N/A
0.47
2.69
4.92

0
1,425
175
320

N/A
0.47
2.69
4.92

Source: USCIS analysis.
Calculation: Increase or Decrease Fee Amount per Scenario/Current Fee Amount = Average Economic Impact Percent

TABLE 30—ESTIMATED ECONOMIC IMPACT ON SMALL ENTITIES FOR PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE BY SCENARIO (E–F),
INITIAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS
Scenario E
Increase/
decrease
from
current
fee

Immigration benefit request

I–129 Petition for a Nonimmigrant worker .......................................................
I–129H1B ..................................................................................................
I–129H2A—Named Beneficiaries .............................................................
I–129H2B—Named Beneficiaries .............................................................
I–129L .......................................................................................................
I–129O ......................................................................................................
Form I–129CW, I–129E&TN, and I–129MISC .........................................
I–129H2A—Unnamed Beneficiaries .........................................................
I–129H2B—Unnamed Beneficiaries .........................................................
I–140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker ......................................................
I–360 Petition for Amerasian Widow(er) or Special Immigrant .......................
I–910 Application for Civil Surgeon Designation .............................................
I–924 Application for Regional Center Designation Under the Immigrant Investor Program .............................................................................................
I–924A Annual Certification of Regional Center ..............................................
G–1041 Genealogy Index Search Request ....................................................
G–1041A Genealogy Records Request ..........................................................

Scenario F

Average
economic
impact
percent

Increase/
decrease
from
current
fee

Average
economic
impact
percent

N/A
$90
350
245
330
235
220
(55)
(70)
(155)
20
(135)

N/A
0.19
0.76
0.53
0.72
0.51
0.48
¥0.12
¥0.15
¥0.221
0.05
¥0.17

N/A
$60
330
225
310
210
200
(75)
(95)
(180)
(5)
(160)

N/A
0.13
0.72
0.49
0.67
0.46
0.43
¥0.16
¥0.21
¥257
0.01
¥0.20

0
1,430
175
320

0
0.47
2.69
4.92

0
1,430
175
320

0
0.47
2.69
4.92

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Source: USCIS analysis.
Calculation: Increase or Decrease Fee Amount per Scenario/Current Fee Amount = Average Economic Impact Percent

To reduce the uncertainty that such
conditions present to the affected
public, USCIS proposes and evaluates
six fee scenarios based on these three
factors. Each scenario lays out what the
fees would be if certain conditions
materialize and present a range of fees.
Thus, the final fees may be one of the
scenarios presented, or an amount in

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

between the highest and lowest fees
proposed. Scenario A refers to the
proposed fees described in detail
throughout this proposed rule. Scenario
B includes DACA renewal fees, but it
excludes the ICE transfer. Scenario C
excludes DACA fees, but it includes the
ICE transfer. Scenario D excludes both
DACA fees and the ICE transfer.

PO 00000

Frm 00067

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Scenarios E and F list separate initial
and renewal fees for DACA, with or
without the ICE transfer. Table 20 lists
the assumptions and effects of these
three factors on each fee scenario. The
preamble has more detail on each
scenario, regarding proposed fee
changes, budgets, and transfers.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

62346

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Furthermore, tables 28 and 29 show
the estimated economic impact on small
entities based on the fee schedule
proposed for each of the fee scenarios.
DHS followed the same method as
previously described in this IRFA to
estimate the economic impact on small
entities for each fee scenario. The tables
illustrate each scenario with an
increased/decreased form fee and
average economic impact, for each
immigration benefit request. The results
show the decreased form fees in
parenthesis produce a negative average
economic impact, in scenarios A–F.
This would indicate across all scenarios,
the economic impact from the decreased
fee would create cost savings and/or
higher revenues for the individual
applicant or petitioner. The negative
number represents cost savings to the
applicant/petitioner. Therefore, the
larger it is the greater the cost savings
for the applicants/petitioners. The
evidence suggests that the increased/
decreased fees proposed by this rule
does not represent a significant
economic impact on these entities.
4. A description of the projected
reporting, recordkeeping, and other
compliance requirements of the
proposed rule, including an estimate of
the classes of small entities that will be
subject to the requirement and the types
of professional skills necessary for
preparation of the report or record.
The proposed rule does not directly
impose any new or additional
‘‘reporting’’ or ‘‘recordkeeping’’
requirements on filers of Forms I–129,
I–140, I–910, I–360, G–1041, G–1041A,
I–924, or I–924A. The proposed rule
does not require any new professional
skills for reporting.
5. An identification, to the extent
practical, of all relevant federal rules
that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict
with the proposed rule.
DHS is unaware of any duplicative,
overlapping, or conflicting Federal
rules, but invites any comment and
information regarding any such rules.
6. Description of any significant
alternatives to the proposed rule that
accomplish the stated objectives of
applicable statutes and that minimize
any significant economic impact of the
proposed rule on small entities,
including alternatives considered such
as:
(1) Establishment of differing
compliance or reporting requirements or
timetables that take into account the
resources available to small entities;
(2) Clarification, consolidation, or
simplification of compliance and
reporting requirements under the rule
for such small entities;

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

(3) Use of performance rather than
design standards; and
(4) Any exemption from coverage of
the rule, or any part thereof, for such
small entities.
The INA provides for the collection of
fees at a level that will ensure recovery
of the full costs of providing
adjudication and naturalization
services, including services provided
without charge to asylum applicants
and certain other immigrant applicants.
In addition, DHS must fund the costs of
providing services without charge by
using a portion of the filing fees that are
collected for other immigration benefits.
Without an adjustment in fees, USCIS
would not be able to sustain the current
level of service for immigration and
naturalization benefits. While most
immigration benefit fees apply to
individuals, as described above, some
also apply to small entities. USCIS seeks
to minimize the impact on all parties,
but in particular small entities. An
alternative to the increased economic
burden of the proposed rule is to
maintain fees at their current level for
small entities. The strength of this
alternative is that it assures no
additional fee-burden is placed on small
entities; however, this alternative also
would cause negative impacts to small
entities.
Without the fee adjustments proposed
in this rule, significant operational
changes would be necessary. Given
current filing volume and other
economic considerations, additional
revenue is necessary to prevent
immediate and significant cuts in
planned spending. These spending cuts
would include reductions in areas such
as federal and contract staff,
infrastructure spending on information
technology and facilities, travel, and
training. Depending on the actual level
of workload received, these operational
changes would result in longer
application processing times, a
degradation in service to applicants and
petitioners, and reduced efficiency over
time. These cuts would ultimately
represent increased costs to small
entities by causing delays in benefit
processing and reduced support service.
Tables 29 and 30 show the estimated
economic impact on small entities based
on each of the fee scenarios considered.
The tables illustrate an increase/
decrease in fee and average economic
impact for each immigration benefit
request in each scenario. The decreased
form fees shown in parentheses produce
negative average economic impacts in
scenarios A–F. This indicates that the
economic impacts from the decreased
fees would create cost savings for
individual applicants and petitioners.

PO 00000

Frm 00068

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

The evidence suggests that the
decreased fees proposed by this rule do
not represent a significant economic
impact on these entities.
7. Questions for Comment to Assist
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
• Please provide comment on the
numbers of small entities that may be
impacted by this rulemaking.
• Please provide comment on any or
all of the provisions in the proposed
rule with regard to the economic impact
of this rule, paying specific attention to
the effect of the rule on small entities in
light of the above analysis, as well as the
full small entity analysis on
regulations.gov.
• Please provide comment on any
significant alternatives DHS should
consider in lieu of the changes proposed
by this rule.
• Please describe ways in which the
rule could be modified to reduce
burdens for small entities consistent
with the Immigration and Nationality
Act and the Chief Financial Officers Act
requirements.
• Please identify all relevant Federal,
State or local rules that may duplicate,
overlap or conflict with the proposed
rule.
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (UMRA) is intended, among
other things, to curb the practice of
imposing unfunded Federal mandates
on State, local, and tribal governments.
Title II of UMRA requires each Federal
agency to prepare a written statement
assessing the effects of any Federal
mandate in a proposed or final agency
rule that may result in a $100 million or
more expenditure (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any one year by State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector. The value
equivalent of $100 million in 1995
adjusted for inflation to 2018 levels by
the Consumer Price Index for All Urban
Consumers (CPI–U) is $165 million.
While this rule may result in the
expenditure of more than $100 million
by the private sector annually, the
rulemaking is not a ‘‘Federal mandate’’
as defined for UMRA purposes.207 The
payment of immigration benefit fees by
individuals or other private sector
entities is, to the extent it could be
termed an enforceable duty, one that
arises from participation in a voluntary
Federal program, applying for
immigration status in the United
States.208 Therefore, no actions were
207 See
208 See

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

2 U.S.C. 658(6).
2 U.S.C. 658(7)(A)(ii).

14NOP2

62347

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
deemed necessary under the provisions
of the UMRA.

60 days after the final rule’s publication,
whichever is later.

F. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice
Reform)

D. Congressional Review Act

E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
This proposed rule would not have
substantial direct effects on the states,
on the relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with section 6 of Executive
Order 13132, it is determined that this
proposed rule does not have sufficient
federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a federalism summary
impact statement.

This proposed rule meets the
applicable standards set forth in
sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive
Order 12988.

This proposed rule is a major rule as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, also known as
the Congressional Review Act, as
enacted in section 251 of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104–
121, 110 Stat. 847, 868 et seq.
Accordingly, this rule, if enacted as a
final rule, would be effective at least 60
days after the date on which Congress
receives a report submitted by DHS
under the Congressional Review Act, or

G. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501–12, DHS must
submit to OMB, for review and
approval, any reporting requirements
inherent in a rule, unless they are
exempt. The Information Collection.
table below shows the summary of
forms that are part of this rulemaking.

TABLE 30—INFORMATION COLLECTION
OMB No.

Form No.

Form name

Type of information
collection

1615–0105 ........

G–28 .................

1615–0096 ........

G–1041 .............

Notice of Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Accredited Representative.
Genealogy Index Search Request ............................

No material or non- substantive change to a currently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive change to a currently approved collection.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

G–1041A ..........
1615–0079 ........

I–102 ................

1615–0111 ........

I–129CW ...........

1615–XXXX ......

I–129E&TN .......

1615–0001 ........

I–129F ..............

1615–0009 ........

I–129H1 ............

1615–XXXX ......

I–129H2A .........

1615–XXXX ......

I–129H2B .........

1615–XXXX ......
1615–XXXX ......

I–129L ..............
I–129MISC .......

1615–XXXX ......
1615–0012 ........

I–129O ..............
I–130 ................

1615–0013 ........
1615–0135 ........

I–130A ..............
I–131 ................
I–131A ..............

1615–0015 ........

I–140 ................

1615–0016 ........

I–191 ................

1615–0017 ........

I–192 ................

1615–0018 ........

I–212 ................

1615–0095 ........

I–290B ..............

1615–0020 ........

I–360 ................

1615–0023 ........

I–485 ................
I–485A ..............
I–485J ...............

1615–0026 ........

VerDate Sep<11>2014

I–526 ................

21:53 Nov 13, 2019

Genealogy Records Request (For each microfilm or
hard copy file).
Application for Replacement/Initial Nonimmigrant
Arrival-Departure Document.
Petition for a CNMI-Only Nonimmigrant Transitional
Worker.
Application for Nonimmigrant Worker: E and TN
Classifications.
Petition for Alien Fiance´(e) ........................................
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H–1 Classifications.
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H–2A Classification.
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H–2B Classification.
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: L Classifications
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H–3, P, Q, or R
Classifications.
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: O Classifications
Petition for Alien Relative ..........................................
Supplemental Information for Spouse Beneficiary.
Application for Travel Document ...............................
Application for Travel Document (Carrier Documentation).
Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker ..........................
Application for Relief Under Former Section 212(c)
of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
Application for Advance Permission to Enter as
Nonimmigrant.
Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission
Into the United States After Deportation or Removal.
Notice of Appeal or Motion .......................................
Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant.
Application to Register Permanent Residence or
Adjust Status.
Supplement A to Form I–485, Adjustment of Status
Under Section 245(i).
Confirmation of Bona Fide Job Offer or Request for
Job Portability Under INA Section 204(j).
Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur .................

Jkt 250001

PO 00000

Frm 00069

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

No material or non- substantive change to a currently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive change to a currently approved collection.
New Collection.
No material or non- substantive change to a currently approved collection.
Revision of a Currently Approved Collection.
New Collection.
New Collection.
New Collection.
New Collection.
New Collection.
No material or non- substantive change to a currently approved collection.
Revision of a Currently Approved Collection.
Revision of a Currently Approved Collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.

change to a curchange to a curchange to a curchange to a cur-

No material or non- substantive change to a currently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive change to a currently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive change to a currently approved collection.

No material or non- substantive change to a currently approved collection.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62348

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 30—INFORMATION COLLECTION—Continued

OMB No.

Form No.

Form name

Type of information
collection

1615–0003 ........

I–539 ................

Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status

1615–0067 ........

I–589 ................

1615–0028 ........

I–600 ................

Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal.
Petition to Classify Orphan as an Immediate Relative.
Application for Advance Processing of an Orphan
Petition.
Form I–600A/I–600 Supplement 1, Listing of Adult
Member of the Household.
Form I–600A/I–600 Supplement 2, Consent to Disclose Information.
Form I–600A/I–600 Supplement 3, Request for Action on Approved Form I–600A/I–600.
Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility

No material or non- substantive change to a currently approved collection.
Revision of a Currently Approved Collection.

I–600A ..............
I–600/A SUPP1
I–600/A SUPP2

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

I–600/A SUPP3
1615–0029 ........

I–601 ................

1615–0123 ........

I–601A ..............

1615–0030 ........

I–612 ................

1615–0032 ........

I–690 ................

1615–0034 ........

I–694 ................

1615–0035 ........

I–698 ................

1615–0038 ........

I–751 ................

Notice of Appeal of Decision Under Sections 245A
or 210 of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Application to Adjust Status From Temporary to
Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A of the
INA).
Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence ..........

1615–0040 ........
1615–0005 ........

I–765 ................
I–817 ................

Application for Employment Authorization ................
Application for Family Unity Benefits ........................

1615–0043 ........

I–821 ................

Application for Temporary Protected Status .............

1615–0124 ........

I–821D ..............

1615–0044 ........

I–824 ................

1615–0045 ........

I–829 ................

1615–0072 ........

I–881 ................

1615–0082 ........

I–90 ..................

Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.
Application for Action on an Approved Application or
Petition.
Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions on
Permanent Resident Status.
Application for Suspension of Deportation or Special Rule Cancellation of Removal.
Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card ...

1615–0048 ........

I–907 ................

Request for Premium Processing Service ................

1615–0114 ........

I–910 ................

Application for Civil Surgeon Designation .................

1615–0116 ........
1615–0099 ........

I–912 ................
I–914 ................

Application for Fee Waiver ........................................
Application for T nonimmigrant status ......................

1615–0104 ........

I–918 ................

Application for U nonimmigrant status ......................

1615–0061 ........

I–924 ................

1615–0106 ........

I–924A ..............
I–929 ................

1615–0136 ........

I–941 ................

Application for Regional Designation Center Under
the Immigrant Investor Program.
Annual Certification of Regional Center.
Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U–1
Nonimmigrant.
Application for Entrepreneur Parole ..........................

1615–0133 ........
1615–0122 ........

I–942 ................
Immigrant Fee ..

Application for Reduced Fee .....................................
Fee paid for immigrant visa processing ....................

1615–0078 ........

N–300 ...............

Application to File Declaration of Intention ...............

1615–0050 ........

N–336 ...............

1615–0052 ........

N–400 ...............

Request for a Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings.
Application for Naturalization ....................................

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Application for Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver.
Application for Waiver of the Foreign Residence Requirement (Under Section 212(e) of the INA, as
Amended).
Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility

Jkt 250001

PO 00000

Frm 00070

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Revision of a Currently Approved Collection.

No material or non- substantive change to a currently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive change to a currently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive change to a currently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive change to a currently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive change to a currently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive change to a currently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
Revision of a Currently Approved
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
Revision of a Currently Approved
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
Revision of a Currently Approved
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
Discontinuation.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

change to a curCollection.
change to a curchange to a curCollection.
change to a curchange to a curchange to a curchange to a curchange to a curchange to a curCollection.
change to a curchange to a curchange to a curchange to a curchange to a curchange to a curchange to a curchange to a curchange to a cur-

62349

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 30—INFORMATION COLLECTION—Continued
Form No.

Form name

1615–0056 ........

N–470 ...............

1615–0091 ........

N–565 ...............

1615–0057 ........

N–600 ...............

Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization
Purposes.
Application for Replacement of Naturalization/Citizenship Document.
Application for Certification of Citizenship ................

1615–0087 ........

N–600K ............

Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate under Section 322.

Various USCIS Forms
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995, Public Law 104–13, all agencies
are required to submit to OMB, for
review and approval, any reporting
requirements inherent in a rule. This
rule will require non-substantive edits
to the forms listed above with the listed
action ‘‘No material/non-substantive
change to a currently approved
collection.’’ These edits include:
updates to the fees collected, including
changes to the collection of biometric
service fees; modification of various
form instructions to conform with
changes to USCIS Form I–912;
modification to USCIS Form N–400 to
conform with the discontinuation of
USCIS Form I–942; modification to
various form instructions to conform
with changes to the conditions for fee
exemptions; removal of the returned
check fee; addition of language
regarding delivery requirements of
certain secured documents; general
language modification of fee activities
within various USCIS forms.
Accordingly, USCIS has submitted a
Paperwork Reduction Act Change
Worksheet, Form OMB 83–C, and
amended information collection
instruments to OMB for review and
approval in accordance with the
PRA.209
USCIS Form I–129H–1
DHS and USCIS invite the general
public and other Federal agencies to
comment on the impact to the proposed
collection of information. In accordance
with the PRA, the information
collection notice is published in the
Federal Register to obtain comments
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Type of information
collection

OMB No.

209 As

stated earlier DHS proposes a biometric
services fee of $30 that will be required for certain
forms for which it performs intake and biometrics
services on behalf of EOIR and to remove the $30
fee for dishonored fee payment instruments. EOIR
will make the changes to their affected forms
required by this rule by submitting a Paperwork
Reduction Act Change Worksheet, Form OMB 83–
C, and amended information collection instruments
to OMB for review and approval if DHS publishes
a final rule to make these proposed changes.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.
No material or non- substantive
rently approved collection.

regarding the proposed edits to the
information collection instrument.
Comments are encouraged and will be
accepted for 60 days from the
publication date of the proposed rule.
All submissions received must include
the OMB Control Number 1615–0009 in
the body of the letter and the agency
name. To avoid duplicate submissions,
please use only one of the methods
under the ADDRESSES and I. Public
Participation section of this rule to
submit comments. Comments on this
information collection should address
one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
Overview of Information Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection:
Revision of a Currently Approved
Collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker: H–
1B Classifications.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the DHS
sponsoring the collection: I–129H1;
USCIS.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Business or other forprofit; Not-for-profit institutions. USCIS
uses the data collected on this form to
determine eligibility for the requested

PO 00000

Frm 00071

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

change to a curchange to a curchange to a curchange to a cur-

nonimmigrant classification and/or
requests to extend or change
nonimmigrant status. An employer (or
agent, where applicable) uses this form
to petition USCIS for classification of an
alien as an H–1B nonimmigrant. An
employer (or agent, where applicable)
also uses this form to request an
extension of stay of an H–1B or H–1B1
nonimmigrant worker or to change the
status of an alien currently in the United
States as a nonimmigrant to H–1B or H–
1B1. The form serves the purpose of
standardizing requests for H–1B and H–
1B1 nonimmigrant workers, and
ensuring that basic information required
for assessing eligibility is provided by
the petitioner while requesting that
beneficiaries be classified under the H–
1B or H–1B1 nonimmigrant
employment categories. It also assists
USCIS in compiling information
required by Congress annually to assess
effectiveness and utilization of certain
nonimmigrant classifications.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: The estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection Form I–129H1 is 358,702 and
the estimated hour burden per response
is 4 hours.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total estimated annual
hour burden associated with this
collection is 1,434,808 hours.
(7) An estimate of the total public
burden (in cost) associated with the
collection: The estimated total annual
cost burden associated with this
collection of information is
$184,731,530.00.
USCIS Form I–129H2A
DHS and USCIS invite the general
public and other Federal agencies to
comment on the impact to the proposed
collection of information. In accordance
with the PRA, the information
collection notice is published in the
Federal Register to obtain comments
regarding the proposed edits to the
information collection instrument.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62350

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Comments are encouraged and will be
accepted for 60 days from the
publication date of the proposed rule.
All submissions received must include
the OMB Control Number 1615–NEW in
the body of the letter and the agency
name. To avoid duplicate submissions,
please use only one of the methods
under the ADDRESSES and I. Public
Participation section of this rule to
submit comments. Comments on this
information collection should address
one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
Overview of Information Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection:
New Collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker: H–
2A Classifications.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the DHS
sponsoring the collection: I–129H2A;
USCIS.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Business or other forprofit; Not-for-profit institutions. USCIS
uses the data collected on this form to
determine eligibility for the requested
H–2A nonimmigrant petition and/or
requests to extend or change
nonimmigrant status. An employer or
agent uses this form to petition USCIS
for classification of an alien as an H–2A
nonimmigrant. An employer or agent
also uses this form to request an
extension of stay or change of status on
behalf of the alien worker. The form
serves the purpose of standardizing
requests for H–2A nonimmigrant
workers, and ensuring that basic
information required for assessing
eligibility is provided by the petitioner.
It also assists USCIS in compiling
information required by Congress
annually to assess effectiveness and

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

utilization of certain nonimmigrant
classifications.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: The estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection Form I–129H2A is 9,870 and
the estimated hour burden per response
is 3 hours; the estimated total number
of respondents for the information
collection Named Worker Attachment
for Form I–129H2A is 68,049 and the
estimated hour burden per response is
30 minutes; the estimated total number
of respondents for the information
collection Joint Employer Supplement
for Form I–129H2A is 5,000 and the
estimated hour burden per response is
10 minutes.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total estimated annual
hour burden associated with this
collection is 64,469.50 hours.
(7) An estimate of the total public
burden (in cost) associated with the
collection: The estimated total annual
cost burden associated with this
collection of information is $5,083,050.
USCIS Form I–129H2B
DHS and USCIS invite the general
public and other Federal agencies to
comment on the impact to the proposed
collection of information. In accordance
with the PRA, the information
collection notice is published in the
Federal Register to obtain comments
regarding the proposed edits to the
information collection instrument.
Comments are encouraged and will be
accepted for 60 days from the
publication date of the proposed rule.
All submissions received must include
the OMB Control Number 1615–NEW in
the body of the letter and the agency
name. To avoid duplicate submissions,
please use only one of the methods
under the ADDRESSES and I. Public
Participation section of this rule to
submit comments. Comments on this
information collection should address
one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who

PO 00000

Frm 00072

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
Overview of Information Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection:
New Collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H–
2B Classification.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the DHS
sponsoring the collection: I–129H2B;
USCIS.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Business or other forprofit; Not-for-profit institutions. USCIS
uses the data collected on this form to
determine eligibility for the requested
H–2B nonimmigrant petition and/or
requests to extend or change
nonimmigrant status. An employer or
agent uses this form to petition USCIS
for classification of an alien as an H–2B
nonimmigrant. An employer or agent
also uses this form to request an
extension of stay or change of status on
behalf of the alien worker. The form
serves the purpose of standardizing
requests for nonimmigrant workers, and
ensuring that basic information required
for assessing eligibility is provided by
the petitioner. It also assists USCIS in
compiling information required by
Congress annually to assess
effectiveness and utilization of certain
nonimmigrant classifications.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: The estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection Form I–129H2B is 5,922 and
the estimated hour burden per response
is 3 hours; the estimated total number
of respondents for the information
collection Named Worker Attachment
for Form I–129H2B is 59,325 and the
estimated hour burden per response is
0.5 hours.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total estimated annual
hour burden associated with this
collection is 47,428.50 hours.
(7) An estimate of the total public
burden (in cost) associated with the
collection: The estimated total annual
cost burden associated with this
collection of information is
$3,049,830.00.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
USCIS Form I–129L
DHS and USCIS invite the general
public and other Federal agencies to
comment on the impact to the proposed
collection of information. In accordance
with the PRA, the information
collection notice is published in the
Federal Register to obtain comments
regarding the proposed edits to the
information collection instrument.
Comments are encouraged and will be
accepted for 60 days from the
publication date of the proposed rule.
All submissions received must include
the OMB Control Number 1615–NEW in
the body of the letter and the agency
name. To avoid duplicate submissions,
please use only one of the methods
under the ADDRESSES and I. Public
Participation section of this rule to
submit comments. Comments on this
information collection should address
one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Overview of Information Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection:
New Collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: I–
129L Classification.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the DHS
sponsoring the collection: I–129L;
USCIS.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Business or other forprofit; Not-for-profit institutions. USCIS
uses the data collected on Form I–129L
to determine a petitioner and
beneficiary’s eligibility for L–1A and L–
1B classification. The form is also used
to determine eligibility for an LZ
Blanket petition. An employer uses this
form to petition USCIS for classification
of the beneficiary as an L–1

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

nonimmigrant. An employer also uses
this form to request an extension of stay
or change of status on behalf of the
beneficiary. The form standardizes these
types of petitioners and ensures that the
information required for assessing
eligibility is provided by the petitioner
about themselves and the beneficiary.
The form also enables USCIS to compile
data required for an annual report to
Congress assessing the effectiveness and
utilization of certain nonimmigrant
classifications.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: The estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection Form I–129L is 42,642 and
the estimated hour burden per response
is 3 hours.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total estimated annual
hour burden associated with this
collection is 127,926 hours.
(7) An estimate of the total public
burden (in cost) associated with the
collection: The estimated total annual
cost burden associated with this
collection of information is
$21,960,630.00.
USCIS Form I–129O
DHS and USCIS invite the general
public and other Federal agencies to
comment on the impact to the proposed
collection of information. In accordance
with the PRA, the information
collection notice is published in the
Federal Register to obtain comments
regarding the proposed edits to the
information collection instrument.
Comments are encouraged and will be
accepted for 60 days from the
publication date of the proposed rule.
All submissions received must include
the OMB Control Number 1615–NEW in
the body of the letter and the agency
name. To avoid duplicate submissions,
please use only one of the methods
under the ADDRESSES and I. Public
Participation section of this rule to
submit comments. Comments on this
information collection should address
one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and

PO 00000

Frm 00073

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62351

(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
Overview of Information Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection:
New Collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: O
Classification.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the DHS
sponsoring the collection: I–129O;
USCIS.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Business or other forprofit; Not-for-profit institutions. USCIS
uses the data collected on this form to
determine eligibility for the requested
nonimmigrant petition and/or requests
to extend or change nonimmigrant
status. An employer or agent uses this
form to petition USCIS for classification
of an alien as an O nonimmigrant
worker. An employer or agent also uses
this form to request an extension of stay
or change of status on behalf of the alien
worker. The form serves the purpose of
standardizing requests for
nonimmigrant workers, and ensuring
that basic information required for
assessing eligibility is provided by the
petitioner while requesting that
beneficiaries be classified under certain
nonimmigrant employment categories. It
also assists USCIS in compiling
information required by Congress
annually to assess effectiveness and
utilization of certain nonimmigrant
classifications.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: The estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection Form I–129O is 20,652 and
the estimated hour burden per response
is 3 hours; the estimated total number
of respondents for the information
collection Attachment 1—Additional
Beneficiary for Form I–129O is 1,012
and the estimated hour burden per
response is 0.5 hours.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total estimated annual
hour burden associated with this
collection is 62,462 hours.
(7) An estimate of the total public
burden (in cost) associated with the
collection: The estimated total annual
cost burden associated with this

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62352

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

collection of information is
$10,635,780.00.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

USCIS Form I–129MISC
DHS and USCIS invite the general
public and other Federal agencies to
comment on the impact to the proposed
collection of information. In accordance
with the PRA, the information
collection notice is published in the
Federal Register to obtain comments
regarding the proposed edits to the
information collection instrument.
Comments are encouraged and will be
accepted for 60 days from the
publication date of the proposed rule.
All submissions received must include
the OMB Control Number 1615–NEW in
the body of the letter and the agency
name. To avoid duplicate submissions,
please use only one of the methods
under the ADDRESSES and I. Public
Participation section of this rule to
submit comments. Comments on this
information collection should address
one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
Overview of Information Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection:
New Collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H–3,
P, Q, or R Classification.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the DHS
sponsoring the collection: I–129MISC;
USCIS.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Business or other forprofit; Not-for-profit institutions. USCIS
uses the data collected on this form to
determine eligibility for the requested
nonimmigrant classification and/or
requests to extend or change
nonimmigrant status. An employer (or
agent, where applicable) uses this form

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

to petition USCIS for classification of an
alien as an H–3, P, Q, or R
nonimmigrant. An employer (or agent,
where applicable) also uses this form to
request an extension of stay of an H–3,
P, Q, or R nonimmigrant worker or to
change the status of an alien currently
in the United States as a nonimmigrant
to H–3, P, Q, or R. The form serves the
purpose of standardizing requests for H–
3, P, Q, or R nonimmigrant workers, and
ensuring that basic information required
for assessing eligibility is provided by
the petitioner while requesting that
beneficiaries be classified under the H–
3, P, Q, or R nonimmigrant employment
categories. It also assists USCIS in
compiling information required by
Congress annually to assess
effectiveness and utilization of certain
nonimmigrant classification.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: The estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection Form I–129MISC is 22,378
and the estimated hour burden per
response is 3 hours; the estimated total
number of respondents for the
information collection H–3
Classification Supplement to Form I–
129MISC, Petition for Nonimmigrant
Worker: H–3, P, Q, or R Classification is
248 and the estimated hour burden per
response is 0.25 hours; the estimated
total number of respondents for the
information collection P Classification
Supplement to Form I–129MISC is
6,094 and the estimated hour burden
per response is 0.5 hours; the estimated
total number of respondents for the
information collection Q–1 International
Cultural Exchange Alien Supplement to
Form I–129MISC is 78 and the
estimated hour burden per response is
0.167 hours; the estimated total number
of respondents for the information
collection R–1 Classification
Supplement to Form I–129MISC is 1
and the estimated hour burden per
response is 1 hours; the estimated total
number of respondents for the
information collection Attachment 1—
Additional Beneficiary for Form I–
129MISC is 6,457 and the estimated
hour burden per response is 0.5 hours.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total estimated annual
hour burden associated with this
collection is 73,494.53 hours.
(7) An estimate of the total public
burden (in cost) associated with the
collection: The estimated total annual
cost burden associated with this
collection of information is $11,524,670.

PO 00000

Frm 00074

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

USCIS Form I–129E&TN
DHS and USCIS invite the general
public and other Federal agencies to
comment on the impact to the proposed
collection of information. In accordance
with the PRA, the information
collection notice is published in the
Federal Register to obtain comments
regarding the proposed edits to the
information collection instrument.
Comments are encouraged and will be
accepted for 60 days from the
publication date of the proposed rule.
All submissions received must include
the OMB Control Number 1615–NEW in
the body of the letter and the agency
name. To avoid duplicate submissions,
please use only one of the methods
under the ADDRESSES and I. Public
Participation section of this rule to
submit comments. Comments on this
information collection should address
one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
Overview of Information Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection:
New Collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: E
and TN Classification.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the DHS
sponsoring the collection: I–129E&TN;
USCIS.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Business or other forprofit; Not-for-profit institutions. USCIS
uses the data collected on this form to
determine eligibility for the requested
nonimmigrant classification and/or
requests to extend or change
nonimmigrant status. An employer
agent, or applicant uses this form to
apply to USCIS for classification of an
alien as an E–1, E–2, E–3, or TN

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

nonimmigrant. An employer, agent,
applicant, or CNMI investor also uses
this form to request an extension of stay
in one of these classifications for an
alien or for themselves, or to change the
status of an alien currently in the United
States as a nonimmigrant or their own
status if they are currently in the United
States as a nonimmigrant to E–1, E–2,
E–3, or TN. The form serves the purpose
of standardizing requests for
nonimmigrant workers in these
classifications, and ensuring that basic
information required for assessing
eligibility is provided by the applicant.
It also assists USCIS in compiling
information required by Congress
annually to assess effectiveness and
utilization of certain nonimmigrant
classification.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: The estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection Form I–129E&TN is 11,860
and the estimated hour burden per
response is 3 hours; the estimated total
number of respondents for the
information collection E–1/E–2
Classification Supplement to Form I–
129E&TN is 3,714 and the estimated
hour burden per response is 1.45 hours;
the estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection E–3 Classification
Supplement to Form I–129E&TN is
1,857 and the estimated hour burden
per response is 1 hours; the estimated
total number of respondents for the
information collection NAFTA
Supplement to Form I–129E&TN is
6,289 and the estimated hour burden
per response is 0.5 hours.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total estimated annual
hour burden associated with this
collection is 45,966.80 hours.
(7) An estimate of the total public
burden (in cost) associated with the
collection: The estimated total annual
cost burden associated with this
collection of information is $6,107,900.
USCIS Form I–131
DHS and USCIS invite the general
public and other Federal agencies to
comment on the impact to the proposed
collection of information. In accordance
with the PRA, the information
collection notice is published in the
Federal Register to obtain comments
regarding the proposed edits to the
information collection instrument.
Comments are encouraged and will be
accepted for 60 days from the
publication date of the proposed rule.
All submissions received must include

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

the OMB Control Number 1615–0013 in
the body of the letter and the agency
name. To avoid duplicate submissions,
please use only one of the methods
under the ADDRESSES and I. Public
Participation section of this rule to
submit comments. Comments on this
information collection should address
one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
Overview of Information Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection:
Revision of a Currently Approved
Collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Application for Travel Document, Form
I–131; Extension, Without Change, of a
Currently Approved Collection.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the DHS
sponsoring the collection: I–131; USCIS.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Individuals or
households. Certain aliens, principally
permanent or conditional residents,
refugees or asylees, applicants for
adjustment of status, aliens in
Temporary Protected Status (TPS), and
aliens abroad seeking humanitarian
parole who need to apply for a travel
document to lawfully enter or reenter
the United States. Eligible recipients of
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
(DACA) may now request an advance
parole documents based on
humanitarian, educational and
employment reasons. Lawful permanent
residents may now file requests for
travel permits (transportation letter or
boarding foil).
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: The estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection I–131 is 464,900 and the

PO 00000

Frm 00075

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62353

estimated hour burden per response is
1.9 hours; the estimated total number of
respondents for biometrics processing is
86,000 and the estimated hour burden
per response is 1.17 hours, the
estimated total number of respondents
for passport-style photos is 360,000 and
the estimated hour burden per response
is 0.5 hours.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total estimated annual
hour burden associated with this
collection is 1,163,930 hours.
(7) An estimate of the total public
burden (in cost) associated with the
collection: The estimated total annual
cost burden associated with this
collection of information is
$143,254,100.
USCIS Form I–131A
DHS and USCIS invite the general
public and other Federal agencies to
comment on the impact to the proposed
collection of information. In accordance
with the PRA, the information
collection notice is published in the
Federal Register to obtain comments
regarding the proposed edits to the
information collection instrument.
Comments are encouraged and will be
accepted for 60 days from the
publication date of the proposed rule.
All submissions received must include
the OMB Control Number 1615–0135 in
the body of the letter and the agency
name. To avoid duplicate submissions,
please use only one of the methods
under the ADDRESSES and I. Public
Participation section of this rule to
submit comments. Comments on this
information collection should address
one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62354

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Overview of Information Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection:
Revision of a Currently Approved
Collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Application for Carrier Documentation.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the DHS
sponsoring the collection: I–131A;
USCIS.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Individuals or
households. USCIS uses the information
provided on Form I–131A to verify the
status of permanent or conditional
residents, and determine whether the
applicant is eligible for the requested
travel document.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: The estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection Form I–131A is 5,100 and the
estimated hour burden per response is
.92 hours; biometrics processing is 5,100
and the estimated hour burden per
response is 1.17 hours.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total estimated annual
hour burden associated with this
collection is 10,659 hours.
(7) An estimate of the total public
burden (in cost) associated with the
collection: The estimated total annual
cost burden associated with this
collection of information is $919,275.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

USCIS Form I–589
DHS and USCIS invite the general
public and other Federal agencies to
comment on the impact to the proposed
collection of information. In accordance
with the PRA, the information
collection notice is published in the
Federal Register to obtain comments
regarding the proposed edits to the
information collection instrument.
Comments are encouraged and will be
accepted for 60 days from the
publication date of the proposed rule.
All submissions received must include
the OMB Control Number 1615–0067 in
the body of the letter and the agency
name. To avoid duplicate submissions,
please use only one of the methods
under the ADDRESSES and I. Public
Participation section of this rule to
submit comments. Comments on this
information collection should address
one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
Overview of Information Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection:
Revision of a Currently Approved
Collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Application for Asylum and for
Withholding of Removal.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the DHS
sponsoring the collection: I–589; USCIS.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Individuals or
households. Form I–589 is necessary to
determine whether an alien applying for
asylum and/or withholding of removal
in the United States is classified as
refugee, and is eligible to remain in the
United States.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: The estimated total number of
USCIS respondents for the information
collection in Form I–589 is
approximately 114,000, and the
estimated annual respondents for Form
I–589 filed with DOJ is approximately
150,000. The estimated hour burden per
response is 13 hours per response; and
the estimated number of respondents
providing biometrics to USCIS is
110,000, and to DOJ (collected on their
behalf by USCIS) is 150,000. The
estimated hour burden per response for
biometrics submissions is 1.17 hours.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total estimated annual
hour burden associated with this
collection for USCIS is 1,610,700 hours,
and for DOJ is 2,125,500.
(7) An estimate of the total public
burden (in cost) associated with the
collection: The estimated total annual
cost burden associated with this
collection of information for USCIS is
estimated to be $44,688,000 and for DOJ
is 59 million.

PO 00000

Frm 00076

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

USCIS Form I–600, I–600A, Supplement
1, Supplement 2, Supplement 3
DHS and USCIS invite the general
public and other Federal agencies to
comment on the impact to the proposed
collection of information. In accordance
with the PRA, the information
collection notice is published in the
Federal Register to obtain comments
regarding the proposed edits to the
information collection instrument.
Comments are encouraged and will be
accepted for 60 days from the
publication date of the proposed rule.
All submissions received must include
the OMB Control Number 1615–0028 in
the body of the letter and the agency
name. To avoid duplicate submissions,
please use only one of the methods
under the ADDRESSES and I. Public
Participation section of this rule to
submit comments. Comments on this
information collection should address
one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
Overview of Information Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection:
Revision of a Currently Approved
Collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Petition to Classify Orphan as an
Immediate Relative; Application for
Advance Processing of an Orphan
Petition; Supplement 1, Listing of an
Adult Member of the Household;
Supplement 2, Consent to Disclose
Information; Supplement 3, Request for
Action on Approved Form I–600A/I–
600.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the DHS
sponsoring the collection: Form I–600,
Form I–600A, Form I–600A/I–600
Supplement 1, Form I–600A/I–600
Supplement 2, Form I–600A/I–600
Supplement 3; USCIS.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Individuals or
households. A U.S. citizen adoptive
parent may file a petition to classify an
orphan as an immediate relative through
Form I–600 under section 101(b)(1)(F) of
the INA. A U.S. citizen prospective
adoptive parent may file Form I–600A
in advance of the Form I–600 filing and
USCIS will make a determination
regarding the prospective adoptive
parent’s eligibility to file Form I–600A
and his or her suitability and eligibility
to properly parent an orphan. A U.S.
citizen prospective/adoptive parent may
file a petition to classify an orphan as
an immediate relative under section
201(b)(2)(A) of the INA through Form I–
600. If there are other adult members of
the U.S. citizen prospective/adoptive
parent’s household, as defined at 8 CFR
204.301, the prospective/adoptive
parent must include Form I–600A/I–600
Supplement 1 when filing both Form I–
600A and Form I–600. A Form I–600A/
I–600 Supplement 2, Consent to
Disclose Information, is an optional
form that a U.S. citizen prospective/
adoptive parent may file to authorize
USCIS to disclose case-related
information that would otherwise be
protected under the Privacy Act, 5
U.S.C. 552a, to adoption service
providers or other individuals. Form I–
600A/I–600 authorized disclosures will
assist USCIS in the adjudication of
Forms I–600A and I–600. USCIS has
created a new Form I–600A/I–600
Supplement 3, Request for Action on
Approved Form I–600A/I–600, for this
information collection. Form I–600A/I–
600 Supplement 3 is a form that
prospective/adoptive parents must use
if they need to request action such as an
extended or updated suitability
determination based upon a significant
change in their circumstances or change
in the number or characteristics of the
children they intend to adopt, a change
in their intended country of adoption, or
a request for a duplicate notice of their
approved Form I–600A suitability
determination.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: The estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection Form I–600 is 1,200 and the
estimated hour burden per response is
1 hour; the estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection Form I–600A is 2,000 and the
estimated hour burden per response is
1 hour; the estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection Form I–600/I–600A

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

Supplement 1 is 301 and the estimated
hour burden per response is 1 hour; the
estimated total number of respondents
for the information collection Form I–
600/I–600A Supplement 2 is 1,260 and
the estimated hour burden per response
is 0.25 hours; the estimated total
number of respondents for the
information collection Form I–600/I–
600A Supplement 3 is 1,286 and the
estimated hour burden per response is
1 hours; the estimated total number of
respondents for the Home Study
information collection is 2,500 and the
estimated hour burden per response is
25 hours; the estimated total number of
respondents for the Biometrics
information collection is 2,520 and the
estimated hour burden per response is
1.17 hours; the estimated total number
of respondents for the Biometrics—DNA
information collection is 2 and the
estimated hour burden per response is
6 hours.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total estimated annual
hour burden associated with this
collection is 70,562.40 hours.
(7) An estimate of the total public
burden (in cost) associated with the
collection: The estimated total annual
cost burden associated with this
collection of information is $7,759,232.
USCIS Form I–765
DHS and USCIS invite the general
public and other Federal agencies to
comment on the impact to the proposed
collection of information. In accordance
with the PRA, the information
collection notice is published in the
Federal Register to obtain comments
regarding the proposed edits to the
information collection instrument.
Comments are encouraged and will be
accepted for 60 days from the
publication date of the proposed rule.
All submissions received must include
the OMB Control Number 1615–0040 in
the body of the letter and the agency
name. To avoid duplicate submissions,
please use only one of the methods
under the ADDRESSES and I. Public
Participation section of this rule to
submit comments. Comments on this
information collection should address
one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;

PO 00000

Frm 00077

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62355

(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
Overview of Information Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection:
Revision of a Currently Approved
Collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Application for Employment
Authorization.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the DHS
sponsoring the collection: I–765; USCIS.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Individuals or
households. USCIS uses Form I–765 to
collect information needed to determine
if an alien is eligible for an initial EAD,
a new replacement EAD, or a
subsequent EAD upon the expiration of
a previous EAD under the same
eligibility category. Aliens in many
immigration statuses are required to
possess an EAD as evidence of work
authorization.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: The estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection I–765 is 2,096,000 and the
estimated hour burden per response is
4.5 hours; the estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection I–765WS is 41,912 and the
estimated hour burden per response is
0.5 hours; the estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection biometrics is 42,387 and the
estimated hour burden per response is
1.17 hours; the estimated total number
of respondents for the information
collection passport photos is 2,096,000
and the estimated hour burden per
response is 0.5 hours.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total estimated annual
hour burden associated with this
collection is 10,550,549 hours.
(7) An estimate of the total public
burden (in cost) associated with the
collection: The estimated total annual
cost burden associated with this
collection of information is
$367,575,520.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62356

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

USCIS Form I–821D
DHS and USCIS invite the general
public and other Federal agencies to
comment on the impact to the proposed
collection of information. In accordance
with the PRA, the information
collection notice is published in the
Federal Register to obtain comments
regarding the proposed edits to the
information collection instrument.
Comments are encouraged and will be
accepted for 60 days from the
publication date of the proposed rule.
All submissions received must include
the OMB Control Number 1615–0124 in
the body of the letter and the agency
name. To avoid duplicate submissions,
please use only one of the methods
under the ADDRESSES and I. Public
Participation section of this rule to
submit comments. Comments on this
information collection should address
one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Overview of Information Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection:
Revision of a Currently Approved
Collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Consideration of Deferred Action for
Childhood Arrivals.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the DHS
sponsoring the collection: Form I–821D;
USCIS.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Individuals or
households. As part of the
administration of its programs, USCIS
exercises its prosecutorial discretion on
a case-by-case basis to defer action on
instituting removal proceedings against
individuals.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

estimated for an average respondent to
respond: The estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection I–821D Initial Request is
40,819 and the estimated hour burden
per response is 3.08 hours. The
estimated total number of respondents
for the information collection I–821D
Renewal Request is 418,775 and the
estimated hour burden per response is
3.08 hours.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total estimated annual
hour burden associated with this
collection is 1,415,550 hours.
(7) An estimate of the total public
burden (in cost) associated with the
collection: The estimated total annual
cost burden associated with this
collection of information is $50,555,340.
USCIS Form I–912
DHS and USCIS invite the general
public and other Federal agencies to
comment on the impact to the proposed
collection of information. In accordance
with the PRA, the information
collection notice is published in the
Federal Register to obtain comments
regarding the proposed edits to the
information collection instrument.
Comments are encouraged and will be
accepted for 60 days from the
publication date of the proposed rule.
All submissions received must include
the OMB Control Number 1615–0116 in
the body of the letter and the agency
name. To avoid duplicate submissions,
please use only one of the methods
under the ADDRESSES and I. Public
Participation section of this rule to
submit comments. Comments on this
information collection should address
one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.

PO 00000

Frm 00078

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Overview of Information Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection:
Revision of a Currently Approved
Collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Application for Fee Waiver.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the DHS
sponsoring the collection: I–912; USCIS.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Individuals or
households. USCIS uses the data
collected on this form to verify that the
applicant is unable to pay for the
immigration benefit being requested.
USCIS will consider waiving a fee for an
application or petition when the
applicant or petitioner clearly
demonstrates that he or she is unable to
pay the fee. Form I–912 standardizes the
collection and analysis of statements
and supporting documentation provided
by the applicant with the fee waiver
request. Form I–912 also streamlines
and expedites USCIS’ review, approval,
or denial of the fee waiver request by
clearly laying out the most salient data
and evidence necessary for the
determination of inability to pay.
Officers evaluate all factors,
circumstances, and evidence supplied
in support of a fee waiver request when
making a final determination. Each case
is unique and is considered on its own
merits. If the fee waiver is granted, the
application will be processed. If the fee
waiver is not granted, USCIS will notify
the applicant and instruct him or her to
file a new application with the
appropriate fee.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: The estimated total number of
respondents for the information
collection I–912 is 116,323 and the
estimated hour burden per response is
1.17 hours; the estimated total number
of respondents for the information
collection DACA Exemptions is 108 and
the estimated hour burden per response
is 1.17 hours; the estimated total
number of respondents for the
information collection 8 CFR 103.7(d)
Director’s exception request is 20 and
the estimated hour burden per response
is 1.17 hours.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total estimated annual
hour burden associated with this
collection is 136,247.67 hours.
(7) An estimate of the total public
burden (in cost) associated with the
collection: The estimated total annual
cost burden associated with this
collection of information is $436,211.25.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
USCIS Form I–942
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995, Public Law 104–13, all agencies
are required to submit to OMB, for
review and approval, any reporting
requirements inherent in a rule.
Although this rule does not impose any
new reporting or recordkeeping
requirements under the PRA, this rule
will require the discontinuation of
USCIS Form I–942, Request for Reduced
Fee. This discontinuation results from
the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
eliminating the option to request a
reduced fee, which makes the Form I–
942 unnecessary. Accordingly, USCIS
has submitted a Paperwork Reduction
Act Change Worksheet, Form OMB 83–
C, and amended information collection
instruments to OMB for review and
approval in accordance with the PRA.
Differences in information collection
request respondent volume and fee
model filing volume projections.
DHS notes that the estimates of
annual filing volume in the PRA section
of this preamble are not the same as
those used in the model used to
calculate the fee amounts proposed in
this rule. For example, the fee
calculation model estimates 163,000
annual Form I–589 filings while the
PRA section estimates the average
annual number of respondents will be
114,000. The model projects 2,851,000
Form I–765 filings while the estimated
total number of respondents for the
information collection I–765 is
2,096,000. As stated in section IV.B.1.a
of this preamble, the VPC forecasts
USCIS workload volume using based on
short- and long-term volume trends and
time series models, historical receipts
data, patterns (such as level, trend, and
seasonality) or correlations with
historical events to forecast receipts.
Workload volume is used to determine
the USCIS resources needed to process
benefit requests and is the primary cost
driver for assigning activity costs to
immigration benefits and biometric
services in the USCIS ABC model. DHS
uses a different method for estimating
the average annual number of
respondents for the information
collection over the three-year OMB
approval of the control number,
generally basing the estimate on the
average filing volumes in the previous 3
of 5 year period, with less consideration
of the volume effects on planned or past
policy changes. Nevertheless, when the
information collection request is nearing
expiration USCIS will update the
estimates of annual respondents based
on actual results in the submission to
OMB. The PRA burden estimates are
generally updated at least every three

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

years. Thus, DHS expects that the PRA
estimated annual respondents will be
updated to reflect the actual effects of
this proposed rule within a relatively
short period after a final rule takes
effect.
H. National Environmental Policy Act
DHS Directive (Dir) 023–01 Rev. 01
establishes the procedures that DHS and
its components use to comply with the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) and the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ)
regulations for implementing NEPA. 40
CFR parts 1500–1508.210 The CEQ
regulations allow Federal agencies to
establish, with CEQ review and
concurrence, categories of actions
(‘‘categorical exclusions’’) which
experience has shown do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment and, therefore, do not
require an Environmental Assessment or
Environmental Impact Statement. 40
CFR 1507.3(b)(2)(ii) and 1508.4. Dir.
023–01 Rev. 01 establishes categorical
exclusions that DHS has found to have
no such effect. Dir. 023–01 Rev. 01
Appendix A Table 1. For an action to be
categorically excluded from further
NEPA review, Dir. 023–01 Rev. 01
requires the action to satisfy each of the
following three conditions: (1) The
entire action clearly fits within one or
more of the Categorical Exclusions; (2)
the action is not a piece of a larger
action; and (3) no extraordinary
circumstances exist that create the
potential for a significant environmental
effect. Dir. 023–01 Rev. 01 section V.B
(1)–(3).
The Department analyzed this
proposed action and concluded that
NEPA does not apply because, as
discussed above, the potential impacts
of the rule are not amenable to further
an analysis which is generally
unquantifiable, largely because of the
lack of any direct causal relationship
between the rule and any specific
impact that might be asserted from
generalized population growth or
otherwise. Attempts at more detailed
analysis would be excessively
speculative. Nevertheless, even if NEPA
did apply to this action, the action
clearly would come within categorical
exclusion A3(d) in Dir. 023–01 Rev. 01,
Appendix A, Table 1, for rules that
interpret or amend an existing
regulation without changing its
environmental effect. This rule is not
210 See also DHS, Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act, https://www.dhs.gov/
publication/directive-023-01-rev-01-andinstruction-manual-023-01-001-01-rev-01-and-catex
(last published Feb. 21, 2019).

PO 00000

Frm 00079

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62357

part of a larger action and presents no
extraordinary circumstances creating
the potential for significant
environmental effects. Therefore, if
NEPA were determined to apply, this
rule would be categorically excluded
from further NEPA review.
List of Subjects
8 CFR Part 103
Administrative practice and
procedures, Authority delegations
(government agencies), Freedom of
Information, Privacy, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, and Surety
bonds.
8 CFR Part 106
Immigration, User fees.
8 CFR Part 204
Administrative practice and
procedure, Immigration, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
8 CFR Part 211
Documentary requirements:
immigrants; waivers.
Accordingly, DHS proposes to amend
chapter I of title 8 of the Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
PART 103—IMMIGRATION BENEFIT
REQUESTS; USCIS FILING
REQUIREMENTS; BIOMETRIC
REQUIREMENTS; AVAILABILITY OF
RECORDS
1. The authority citation for part 103
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a; 8 U.S.C.
1101, 1103, 1304, 1356, 1356b, 1372; 31
U.S.C. 9701; Pub. L. 107–296, 116 Stat. 2135
(6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.); E.O. 12356, 47 FR
14874, 15557, 3 CFR, 1982 Comp., p. 166; 8
CFR part 2; Pub. L. 112–54, 125 Stat 550 (8
U.S.C. 1185 note).

2. The heading for part 103 is revised
to read as set forth above.
■ 3. Section 103.2 amended:
■ a. By revising the last sentence of
paragraph (a)(1);
■ b. By revising paragraph (a)(7)(ii)(D);
■ c. In paragraph (b)(9) introductory text
by removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(C)’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in the second sentence; and
■ d. By revising paragraph (b)(19)(iii).
The revisions read as follows:
■

§ 103.2 Submission and adjudication of
benefit requests.

(a) * * *
(1) * * * Filing fees generally are
non-refundable regardless of if the
benefit request is approved or denied, or
how much time the adjudication
requires. Except as otherwise provided

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62358

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

in this chapter I, fees must be paid when
the benefit request is filed.
*
*
*
*
*
(7) * * *
(ii) * * *
(D) Submitted with the correct fee(s).
If a check or other financial instrument
used to pay a fee is returned as
unpayable because of insufficient funds,
USCIS will resubmit the payment to the
remitter institution one time. If the
instrument used to pay a fee is returned
as unpayable a second time, the filing
may be rejected. Financial instruments
returned as unpayable for a reason other
than insufficient funds will not be
redeposited. If a check or other financial
instrument used to pay a fee is dated
more than one year before the request is
received, the payment and request may
be rejected.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(19) * * *
(iii) Secure identity documents. (A)
USCIS will send secure identification
documents, such as a Permanent
Resident Card or Employment
Authorization Document, only to the
applicant or self-petitioner unless the
applicant or self-petitioner specifically
consents to having his or her secure
identification document sent to a
designated agent, their attorney or
accredited representative or record, as
specified on the form instructions.
(B) The designated agent, or attorney
or accredited representative, will be
required to provide identification and
sign for receipt of the secure document.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 103.3

[Amended]

4. Section 103.3 is amended by
removing ‘‘§ 103.7 of this part’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (a)(2)(i).

■

§ 103.5

[Amended]

5. Section 103.5 is amended by
removing ‘‘§ 103.7’’ and adding in its
place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in paragraph
(a)(1)(iii)(B).
■ 6. Section 103.7 is revised to read as
follows:
■

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

§ 103.7

Fees.

(a) DOJ fees. Fees for proceedings
before immigration judges and the
Board of Immigration Appeals are
described in 8 CFR 1003.8, 1003.24, and
1103.7.
(1) USCIS may accept DOJ fees.
Except as provided in 8 CFR 1003.8, or
as the Attorney General otherwise may
provide by regulation, any fee relating to
any EOIR proceeding may be paid to
USCIS. Payment of a fee under this
section does not constitute filing of the

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

document with the Board or with the
immigration court. DHS will provide the
payer with a receipt for a fee and return
any documents submitted with the fee
relating to any immigration court
proceeding.
(2) DHS–EOIR biometric services fee.
Fees paid to and accepted by DHS
relating to any immigration proceeding
as provided in 8 CFR 1103.7(a)(3) must
include an additional $30 for DHS to
collect, store, and use biometric
information.
(3) Waiver of Immigration Court fees.
An immigration judge or the Board may
waive any fees prescribed under this
chapter for cases under their
jurisdiction to the extent provided in 8
CFR 1003.8 and 1003.24.
(b) USCIS fees. USCIS fees will be
required as provided in 8 CFR part 106.
(c) Remittances. Remittances to the
Board of Immigration Appeals must be
made payable to the ‘‘United States
Department of Justice,’’ in accordance
with 8 CFR 1003.8.
(d) Non-USCIS DHS immigration fees.
The following fees are applicable to one
or more of the immigration components
of DHS:
(1) DCL System Costs Fee. For use of
a Dedicated Commuter Lane (DCL)
located at specific U.S. ports-of-entry by
an approved participant in a designated
vehicle:
(i) $80.00, or
(ii) $160.00 for a family (applicant,
spouse and minor children); plus,
(iii) $42 for each additional vehicle
enrolled.
(iv) The fee is due after approval of
the application but before use of the
DCL.
(v) This fee is non-refundable, but
may be waived by DHS.
(2) Petition for Approval of School for
Attendance by Nonimmigrant Student
(Form I–17). (i) For filing a petition for
school certification: $3,000 plus, a site
visit fee of $655 for each location
required to be listed on the form;
(ii) For filing a petition for school
recertification: $1,250, plus a site visit
fee of $655 for each new location
required to be listed on the form.
(3) Form I–68. For application for
issuance of the Canadian Border Boat
Landing Permit under section 235 of the
Act:
(i) $16.00, or
(ii) $32 for a family (applicant, spouse
and unmarried children under 21 years
of age, and parents of either spouse).
(4) Form I–94. For issuance of Arrival/
Departure Record at a land border portof-entry: $6.00.
(5) Form I–94W. For issuance of
Nonimmigrant Visa Waiver Arrival/
Departure Form at a land border port-of-

PO 00000

Frm 00080

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

entry under section 217 of the Act:
$6.00.
(6) Form I–246. For filing application
for stay of deportation under 8 CFR part
243: $155.00.
(7) Form I–823. For application to a
PORTPASS program under section 286
of the Act:
(i) $25.00, or
(ii) $50.00 for a family (applicant,
spouse, and minor children).
(iii) The application fee may be
waived by DHS.
(iv) If fingerprints are required, the
inspector will inform the applicant of
the current Federal Bureau of
Investigation fee for conducting
fingerprint checks prior to accepting the
application fee.
(v) The application fee (if not waived)
and fingerprint fee must be paid to CBP
before the application will be processed.
The fingerprint fee may not be waived.
(vi) For replacement of PORTPASS
documentation during the participation
period: $25.00.
(8) Fee Remittance for F, J, and M
Nonimmigrants (Form I–901). The fee
for Form I–901 is:
(i) For F and M students: $350.
(ii) For J–1 au pairs, camp counselors,
and participants in a summer work or
travel program: $35.
(iii) For all other J exchange visitors
(except those participating in a program
sponsored by the Federal Government):
$220.
(iv) There is no Form I–901 fee for J
exchange visitors in federally funded
programs with a program identifier
designation prefix that begins with G–1,
G–2, G–3, or G–7.
(9) Special statistical tabulations: The
DHS cost of the work involved.
(10) Monthly, semiannual, or annual
‘‘Passenger Travel Reports via Sea and
Air’’ tables:
(i) For the years 1975 and before:
$7.00.
(ii) For after 1975: Contact: U.S.
Department of Transportation,
Transportation Systems Center, Kendall
Square, Cambridge, MA 02142.
(11) Request for Classification of a
citizen of Canada to engage in
professional business activities pursuant
to section 214(e) of the Act (Chapter 16
of the North American Free Trade
Agreement). $50.00.
(12) Request for authorization for
parole of an alien into the United States.
$65.00.
(13) Global Entry. Application for
Global Entry: $100.
(14) U.S. Asia-Pacific Economic
Cooperation (APEC) Business Travel
Card. Application fee: $70.
(15) Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form
I–290B) filed with ICE SEVP. For a Form

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
I–290B filed with the Student and
Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP): $675.
■ 7. Section 103.17 is revised to read as
follows:
§ 103.17

Biometric services fee.

DHS may charge a fee to collect
biometric information, to provide
biometric collection services, to conduct
required national security and criminal
history background checks, to verify an
individual’s identity, and to store and
maintain this biometric information for
reuse to support other benefit requests.
If a request for immigration benefits
must be submitted with a biometric
services fee, 8 CFR part 106 will contain
the requirement. When a biometric
services fee is required, a benefit request
submitted without the correct biometric
services fee may be rejected.
■ 8. Section 103.40 is revised to read as
follows:

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

§ 103.40

Genealogical research requests.

(a) Nature of requests. Genealogy
requests are requests for searches and/
or copies of historical records relating to
a deceased person, usually for genealogy
and family history research purposes.
(b) Forms. (1) USCIS provides on its
website at https://www.uscis.gov/
genealogy the required forms in
electronic versions: Genealogy Index
Search Request, or Genealogy Records
Request.
(c) Required information.
Genealogical Research Requests may be
submitted to request one or more
separate records relating to an
individual. A separate request must be
submitted for each individual searched.
All requests for records or index
searches must include the individual’s:
(i) Full name (including variant
spellings of the name and/or aliases, if
any).
(ii) Date of birth, at least as specific as
a year.
(iii) Place of birth, at least as specific
as a country and preferably the country
name at the time of the individual’s
immigration or naturalization.
(d) Optional information. To better
ensure a successful search, a
Genealogical Research Request may
include each individual’s:
(i) Date of arrival in the United States.
(ii) Residence address at time of
naturalization.
(iii) Names of parents, spouse, and
children if applicable and available.
(d) Additional information required to
retrieve records. For a Genealogy
Records Request, requests for copies of
historical records or files must:
(i) Identify the record by number or
other specific data used by the
Genealogy Program Office to retrieve the
record as follows:

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

(A) C-Files must be identified by a
naturalization certificate number.
(B) Forms AR–2 and A-Files
numbered below 8 million must be
identified by Alien Registration
Number.
(C) Visa Files must be identified by
the Visa File Number. Registry Files
must be identified by the Registry File
Number (for example, R–12345).
(e) Information required for release of
records. (1) Documentary evidence must
be attached to a Genealogy Records
Request or submitted in accordance
with the instructions on the Genealogy
Records Request form.
(2) Search subjects will be presumed
deceased if their birth dates are more
than 100 years before the date of the
request. In other cases, the subject is
presumed to be living until the
requestor establishes to the satisfaction
of USCIS that the subject is deceased.
(3) Documentary evidence of the
subject’s death is required (including
but not limited to death records,
published obituaries or eulogies,
published death notices, church or bible
records, photographs of gravestones,
and/or copies of official documents
relating to payment of death benefits).
(f) Index search. Requestors who are
unsure whether USCIS has any record of
their ancestor, or who suspect a record
exists but cannot identify that record by
number, may submit a request for index
search. An index search will determine
the existence of responsive historical
records. If no record is found, USCIS
will notify the requestor accordingly. If
records are found, USCIS will give the
requestor electronic copies of records
stored in digital format for no additional
fee. For records found that are stored in
paper format, USCIS will give the
requestor the search results, including
the type of record found and the file
number or other information identifying
the record. The requestor can use index
search results to submit a Genealogy
Records Request.
(g) Processing of paper record copy
requests. This service is designed for
requestors who can identify a specific
record or file to be retrieved, copied,
reviewed, and released. Requestors may
identify one or more files in a single
request.
§ 103.41

[Removed and Reserved]

9. Section 103.41 is removed and
reserved.
■ 10. Part 106 is added to read as
follows:
■

PART 106—USCIS FEE SCHEDULE
Sec.
106.1
106.2

PO 00000

Fee requirements.
Fees.

Frm 00081

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

106.3
106.4
106.5
106.6

62359

Fee waivers and exemptions.
Premium processing service.
Authority to certify records.
DHS severability.

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1254a,
1254b, 1304, 1356; Pub. L. 107–609; Pub. L.
115–218.
§ 106.1

Fee requirements.

(a) Fees must be submitted with any
USCIS benefit request or other request
in the amount and subject to the
conditions provided in this part and
remitted in the manner prescribed in the
relevant form instructions, on the USCIS
website, or in a Federal Register
document. The fees established in this
part are associated with the benefit, the
adjudication, or the type of request and
not solely determined by the form
number listed below.
(b) Fees must be remitted from a bank
or other institution located in the
United States and payable in U.S.
currency. The fee must be paid using
the method that USCIS prescribes for
the request, office, filing method, or
filing location, as provided in the form
instructions or by individual notice.
(c) If a remittance in payment of a fee
or any other matter is not honored by
the bank or financial institution on
which it is drawn:
(1) The provisions of 8 CFR
103.2(a)(7)(ii) apply, no receipt will be
issued, and if a receipt was issued, it is
void and the benefit request loses its
receipt date; and
(2) If the benefit request was
approved, the approval may be revoked
upon notice. If the approved benefit
request requires multiple fees, this
provision will apply if any fee
submitted is not honored. Other fees
that were paid for a benefit request that
is revoked under this provision will be
retained and not refunded. A revocation
of an approval because the fee
submitted is not honored may be
appealed to the USCIS Administrative
Appeals Office, in accordance with 8
CFR 103.3 and the applicable form
instructions.
§ 106.2

Fees.

(a) I Forms—(1) Application to
Replace Permanent Resident Card, Form
I–90. For filing an application for a
Permanent Resident Card, Form I–551,
to replace an obsolete card or to replace
one lost, mutilated, or destroyed, or for
a change in name: $415.
(2) Application for Replacement/
Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival-Departure
Document, Form I–102. For filing an
application for Arrival/Departure
Record Form I–94, or Crewman’s
Landing Permit Form I–95, to replace
one lost, mutilated, or destroyed: $490.

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

62360

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

(i) For nonimmigrant member of in
the U.S. armed forces: No fee for initial
filing;
(ii) For a nonimmigrant member of the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO) armed forces or civil
component: No fee for initial filing;
(iii) For nonimmigrant member of the
Partnership for Peace military program
under the Status of Forces Agreement
(SOFA): No fee for initial filing.
(3) Petition or Application for a
Nonimmigrant Worker. For filing a
petition or application for a
nonimmigrant worker:
(i) Petition for H–1B Nonimmigrant
Worker or H–1B1 Free Trade
Nonimmigrant Worker, Form I–129H1:
$560.
(ii) Petition for H–2A Nonimmigrant
Worker, Form I–129H2A, with 1 to 25
named beneficiaries: $860.
(iii) Petition for H–2A Nonimmigrant
Worker, Form I–129H2A, with only
unnamed beneficiaries: $425.
(iv) Petition for H–2B Nonimmigrant
Worker, Form I–129H2B, with 1 to 25
named beneficiaries: $725.
(v) Petition for H–2B Nonimmigrant
Worker, Form I–129H2B, with only
unnamed beneficiaries: $395.
(vi) Petition for L Nonimmigrant
Worker, Form I–129L: $815.
(vii) Petition for O Nonimmigrant
Worker, Form I–129O, with 1 to 25
named beneficiaries: $715.
(viii) Petition or Application for E, H–
3, P, Q, R, or TN Nonimmigrant Worker,
Forms I–129E or I–129MISC, with 1 to
25 named beneficiaries: $705.
(4) Petition for a CNMI-Only
Nonimmigrant Transitional Worker,
Form I–129CW. For an employer to
petition on behalf of beneficiaries in the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands (CNMI): $705.
(i) Additional fees in 8 CFR 106.2(c)
may apply.
(5) Petition for Alien Fiance´(e), Form
I–129F:
(i) For filing a petition to classify a
nonimmigrant as a fiance´e or fiance´
under section 214(d) of the Act: $520.
(ii) For a K–3 spouse as designated in
8 CFR 214.1(a)(2) who is the beneficiary
of an immigrant petition filed by a U.S.
citizen on a Petition for Alien Relative,
Form I–130: No fee.
(6) Petition for Alien Relative, Form I–
130. For filing a petition to classify
status of a foreign national relative for
issuance of an immigrant visa under
section 204(a) of the Act: $555.
(7) Application for Travel Document,
Form I–131. For filing an application for
travel document:
(i) $145 for a Refugee Travel
Document for someone 16 or older.
(ii) $115 for a Refugee Travel
Document for a child under 16.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

(iii) $585 for advance parole and any
other travel document.
(iv) There is no fee for applicants who
filed USCIS Form I–485 on or after July
30, 2007, and before [EFFECTIVE DATE
OF THE FINAL RULE], and paid the
Form I–485 fee, or for applicants for
Special Immigrant Status based on an
approved Form I–360 as an Afghan or
Iraqi Interpreter, or Iraqi National
employed by or on behalf of the U.S.
Government or Afghan National
employed by the U.S. Government or
the International Security Assistance
Forces (‘‘ISAF’’).
(8) Application for Carrier
Documentation, Form I–131A. For filing
an application to allow a lawful
permanent resident to apply for a travel
document (carrier documentation) to
board an airline or other transportation
carrier to return to the United States:
$1,010.
(9) Immigrant Petition for Alien
Worker, Form I–140. For filing a petition
to classify preference status of an alien
on the basis of profession or occupation
under section 204(a) of the Act: $545.
(10) Application for Relief Under
Former Section 212(c) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA),
Form I–191. For filing an application for
discretionary relief under section 212(c)
of the Act: $800.
(11) Application for Advance
Permission to Enter as a Nonimmigrant,
Form I–192. For filing an application for
discretionary relief under section
212(d)(3), (d)(13), or (d)(14) of the Act,
except in an emergency case or where
the approval of the application is in the
interest of the U.S. Government: $1,415.
(12) Application for Waiver of
Passport and/or Visa, Form I–193. For
filing an application for waiver of
passport and/or visa: $2,790.
(13) Application for Permission to
Reapply for Admission into the United
States After Deportation or Removal,
Form I–212. For filing an application for
permission to reapply for admission by
an excluded, deported or removed alien,
an alien who has fallen into distress, an
alien who has been removed as an alien
enemy, or an alien who has been
removed at government expense:
$1,040.
(14) Notice of Appeal or Motion, Form
I–290B. For appealing a decision under
the immigration laws in any type of
proceeding over which the Board of
Immigration Appeals does not have
appellate jurisdiction: $705. The fee will
be the same for appeal of a denial of a
benefit request with one or multiple
beneficiaries. There is no fee for an
appeal or motion associated with a
denial of a petition for a special
immigrant visa filed by or on behalf of

PO 00000

Frm 00082

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

an individual seeking special immigrant
status as an Iraqi or Afghan national
who was employed by or on behalf of
the U.S. Government in Iraq or
Afghanistan.
(15) Petition for Amerasian,
Widow(er), or Special Immigrant, Form
I–360. For filing a petition for an
Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special
Immigrant: $455. The following requests
are exempt from this fee:
(i) A petition seeking classification as
an Amerasian;
(ii) A self-petition for immigrant
status as an abused spouse or child of
a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent
resident or an abused parent of a U.S.
citizen son or daughter; or
(iii) A petition for special immigrant
juvenile classification; or
(iv) A petition seeking special
immigrant visa or status an Iraqi or
Afghan national who was employed by
or on behalf of the U.S. Government in
Iraq or Afghanistan.
(16) Application to Register
Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,
Form I–485. For filing an application for
permanent resident status or creation of
a record of lawful permanent residence
$1,120. There is no fee if an applicant
is filing as a refugee under section
209(a) of the Act or for applicants for
Special Immigrant Status based on an
approved Form I–360 as an Afghan or
Iraqi Interpreter, or Iraqi National
employed by or on behalf of the U.S.
Government or Afghan National
employed by the U.S. Government or
the International Security Assistance
Forces (‘‘ISAF’’).
(17) Application to Adjust Status
under Section 245(i) of the Act, Form I–
485 Supplement A. Supplement A to
Form I–485 for persons seeking to adjust
status under the provisions of section
245(i) of the Act: A sum of $1,000 must
be paid while the applicant’s
Application to Register Permanent
Residence or Adjust Status is pending,
unless payment of the additional sum is
not required under section 245(i) of the
Act.
(18) Immigrant Petition by Alien
Entrepreneur, Form I–526. For filing a
petition for an alien entrepreneur:
$4,015.
(19) Application To Extend/Change
Nonimmigrant Status, Form I–539. For
filing an application to extend or change
nonimmigrant status: $400.
(i) For nonimmigrant A, G, and
NATO: No fee.
(20) Application for Asylum and for
Withholding of Removal, Form I–589.
For filing an application for asylum
status: $50. There is no fee for
applications filed by unaccompanied

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
alien children who are in removal
proceedings.
(21) Petition to Classify Orphan as an
Immediate Relative, Form I–600. For
filing a petition to classify an orphan as
an immediate relative for issuance of an
immigrant visa under section 204(a) of
the Act.
(i) There is no fee for the first Form
I–600 filed for a child on the basis of an
approved Application for Advance
Processing of an Orphan Petition, Form
I–600A, during the Form I–600A
approval or extended approval period.
(ii) Except as specified in (iii) below,
if more than one Form I–600 is filed
during the Form I–600A approval
period, the fee is $810 for the second
and each subsequent Form I–600
petition submitted.
(iii) If more than one Form I–600 is
filed during the Form I–600A approval
period on behalf of beneficiary birth
siblings, no additional fee is required.
(22) Application for Advance
Processing of an Orphan Petition, Form
I–600A. For filing an application for
determination of suitability and
eligibility to adopt an orphan: $810.
(23) Request for Action on Approved
Form I–600A/I–600, Form I–600A/I–600
Supplement 3. This filing fee is not
charged if Form I–600A/I–600
Supplement 3 is filed in order to obtain
a first extension of the approval of the
Form I–600A or to obtain a first time
change of non-Hague Adoption
Convention country during the Form I–
600A approval period. If Form I–600A/
I–600 Supplement 3 is filed in order to
request a new approval notice based on
a significant change and updated home
study, the filing fee is charged unless a
first extension of the Form I–600A
approval or first time change of nonHague Adoption Convention country is
also being requested on the same
Supplement 3. Second or subsequent
extensions of the approval of the Form
I–600A, second or subsequent changes
of non-Hague Adoption Convention
country, requests for a new approval
notice based on a significant change and
updated home study, and requests for a
duplicate approval notice are permitted
with Form I–600A/I–600 Supplement 3
with the filing fee: $405. Form I–600A/
I–600 Supplement 3 cannot be used to
extend eligibility to proceed as a Hague
Adoption Convention transition case
beyond the first extension once the
Convention enters into force for the new
Convention country. Form I–600A/I–
600 Supplement 3 cannot be used to
request a change of country to a Hague
Adoption Convention transition country
for purposes of becoming a transition
case if another country was already
designated on the Form I–600A or prior

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

change of country request. Form I–
600A/I–600 Supplement 3 may only be
used to request an increase the number
of children the applicant/petitioner is
approved to adopt from a transition
country if the additional child is a birth
sibling of a child who the applicant/
petitioner has adopted or is in the
process of adopting, as a transition case,
and is identified and petitioned for
while the Form I–600A approval is
valid, unless the new Convention
country prohibits such birth sibling
cases from proceeding as transition
cases.
(24) Application for Waiver of Ground
of Inadmissibility, Form I–601. For filing
an application for waiver of grounds of
inadmissibility: $985.
(25) Application for Provisional
Unlawful Presence Waiver, Form I–
601A. For filing an application for
provisional unlawful presence waiver:
$960.
(26) Application for Waiver of the
Foreign Residence Requirement (under
Section 212(e) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act, as Amended), Form I–
612. For filing an application for waiver
of the foreign-residence requirement
under section 212(e) of the Act: $525.
(27) Application for Status as a
Temporary Resident under Section
245A of the Immigration and
Nationality Act, Form I–687. For filing
an application for status as a temporary
resident under section 245A(a) of the
Act: $1,130.
(28) Application for Waiver of
Grounds of Inadmissibility, Form I–690.
For filing an application for waiver of a
ground of inadmissibility under section
212(a) of the Act as amended, in
conjunction with the application under
sections 210 or 245A of the Act, or a
petition under section 210A of the Act:
$770.
(29) Notice of Appeal of Decision
under Sections 245A or 210 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (or a
petition under section 210A of the Act),
Form I–694. For appealing the denial of
an application under sections 210 or
245A of the Act, or a petition under
section 210A of the Act: $725.
(30) Application to Adjust Status from
Temporary to Permanent Resident
(Under Section 245A of the INA), Form
I–698. For filing an application to adjust
status from temporary to permanent
resident (under section 245A of Pub. L.
99–603): $1,615. The adjustment date is
the date of filing of the application for
permanent residence or the applicant’s
eligibility date, whichever is later.
(31) Petition to Remove Conditions on
Residence, Form I–751. For filing a
petition to remove the conditions on
residence based on marriage: $760.

PO 00000

Frm 00083

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62361

(32) Application for Employment
Authorization, Form I–765: $490.
Application for Employment
Authorization for Abused
Nonimmigrant Spouse, Form I–765V:
No fee. There is no initial fee for:
(i) An applicant who filed USCIS
Form I–485 on or after July 30, 2007,
and before [EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE
FINAL RULE], and paid the Form I–485
fee;
(ii) Refugees and aliens paroled as
refugee;
(iii) Victims of Severe Forms of
Trafficking (T–1);
(iv) Nonimmigrant Victim of Criminal
Activity (U–1);
(v) Dependents of certain government
and internal organizations or NATO
personnel;
(vi) N–8 (Parent of alien classed as
SK3) and N–9 (Child of N–8)
nonimmigrants;
(vi) VAWA Self-Petitioners;
(vii) Applicants for Special Immigrant
Status based on an approved Form I–
360 as an Afghan or Iraqi Interpreter, or
Iraqi National employed by or on behalf
of the U.S. Government or Afghan
National employed by the U.S.
Government or the International
Security Assistance Forces (‘‘ISAF’’);
and
(viii) Aliens granted asylee status
(AS1, AS6).
(33) Petition to Classify Convention
Adoptee as an Immediate Relative,
Form I–800. (i) There is no fee for the
first Form I–800 filed for a child on the
basis of an approved Application for
Determination of Suitability to Adopt a
Child from a Convention Country, Form
I–800A, during the Form I–800A
approval period.
(ii) Except as specified in paragraph
(a)(33)(iii) of this section, if more than
one Form I–800 is filed during the Form
I–800A approval period, the fee is $810
for the second and each subsequent
Form I–800 petition submitted.
(iii) If more than one Form I–800 is
filed during the Form I–800A approval
period on behalf of beneficiary birth
siblings, no additional fee is required.
(34) Application for Determination of
Suitability to Adopt a Child from a
Convention Country, Form I–800A. For
filing an application for determination
of suitability and eligibility to adopt a
child from a Hague Adoption
Convention country: $810.
(35) Request for Action on Approved
Application for Determination of
Suitability to Adopt a Child from a
Convention Country, Form I–800A,
Supplement 3. This filing fee is not
charged if Form I–800A Supplement 3
is filed in order to obtain a first
extension of the approval of the Form I–

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

62362

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

800A or to obtain a first time change of
Hague Adoption Convention country
during the Form I–800A approval
period. If Form I–800A Supplement 3 is
filed in order to request a new approval
notice based on a significant change and
updated home study, the filing fee is
charged unless a first extension of the
Form I–800A approval or first time
change of Hague Adoption Convention
country is also being requested on the
same Supplement 3. Second or
subsequent extensions of the Form I–
800A approval, second or subsequent
changes of Hague Adoption Convention
country, requests for a new approval
notice based on a significant change and
updated home study, and requests for a
duplicate approval notice are permitted
with the filing of a Form I–800A,
Supplement 3 and the required filing
fee: $405.
(36) Application for Family Unity
Benefits, Form I–817. For filing an
application for voluntary departure
under the Family Unity Program: $590.
(37) Application for Temporary
Protected Status, Form I–821. (i) For
first time applicants: $50 or the
maximum permitted by section
244(c)(1)(B) of the Act.
(ii) There is no fee for re-registration.
(iii) A Temporary Protected Status
(TPS) applicant or re-registrant must
pay $30 for biometric services unless
exempted in the applicable form
instructions.
(38) Consideration of Deferred Action
for Childhood Arrivals, Form I–821D. (i)
For first time requestors: $0.
(ii) The fee for renewal is $275.
(39) Application for Action on an
Approved Application or Petition, Form
I–824. $500.
(40) Petition by Entrepreneur to
Remove Conditions on Permanent
Resident Status, Form I–829. For filing
a petition by entrepreneur to remove
conditions: $3,900.
(41) Application for Suspension of
Deportation or Special Rule
Cancellation of Removal (Pursuant to
Section 203 of Pub. L. 105–100), Form
I–881. (i) $1,800 for adjudication by
DHS.
(ii) $165 for adjudication by EOIR. If
the Form I–881 is referred to the
immigration court by DHS the $1,800
fee is required.
(42) Application for Authorization to
Issue Certification for Health Care
Workers, Form I–905. $230.
(43) Request for Premium Processing
Service, Form I–907. The Request for
Premium Processing Service fee will be
as provided in 8 CFR 106.4.
(44) Application for Civil Surgeon
Designation, Form I–910. $650.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

(45) Application for T Nonimmigrant
Status, Form I–914. No fee.
(46) Petition for U Nonimmigrant
Status, Form I–918. No fee.
(47) Application for Regional Center
Designation under the Immigrant
Investor Program, Form I–924. $17,795.
(48) Annual Certification of Regional
Center, Form I–924A. To provide
updated information and certify that a
Regional Center under the Immigrant
Investor Program has maintained its
eligibility: $4,470.
(49) Petition for Qualifying Family
Member of a U–1 Nonimmigrant, Form
I–929. For a principal U–1
nonimmigrant to request immigration
benefits on behalf of a qualifying family
member who has never held U
nonimmigrant status: $1,515.
(50) Application for Entrepreneur
Parole, Form I–941. For filing an
application for parole for an
entrepreneur: $1,200.
(51) Public charge Bond, Form I–945.
$25.
(52) Request for Cancellation of Public
Charge Bond, Form I–356. $25.
(b) N Forms—(1) Application to File
Declaration of Intention, Form N–300.
For filing an application for declaration
of intention to become a U.S. citizen:
$1,320.
(2) Request for a Hearing on a
Decision in Naturalization Proceedings
(under section 336 of the Act), Form N–
336. For filing a request for hearing on
a decision in naturalization proceedings
under section 336 of the Act: $1,755.
There is no fee for an applicant who has
filed an Application for Naturalization
under sections 328 or 329 of the Act
with respect to military service and
whose application has been denied.
(3) Application for Naturalization,
Form N–400. For filing an application
for naturalization: $1,170. No fee is
charged an applicant who meets the
requirements of sections 328 or 329 of
the Act with respect to military service.
(4) Application to Preserve Residence
for Naturalization Purposes, Form N–
470. For filing an application for
benefits under section 316(b) or 317 of
the Act: $1,600.
(5) Application for Replacement
Naturalization/Citizenship Document,
Form N–565. For filing an application
for a certificate of naturalization or
declaration of intention in place of a
certificate or declaration alleged to have
been lost, mutilated, or destroyed; for a
certificate of citizenship in a changed
name under section 343(c) of the Act; or
for a special certificate of naturalization
to obtain recognition as a citizen of the
United States by a foreign state under
section 343(b) of the Act: $545. There is
no fee when this application is

PO 00000

Frm 00084

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

submitted under 8 CFR 338.5(a) or
343a.1 to request correction of a
certificate that contains an error.
(6) Application for Certificate of
Citizenship, Form N–600. For filing an
application for a certificate of
citizenship under section 309(c) or
section 341 of the Act: $1,015. There is
no fee for any application filed by a
member or veteran of any branch of the
U.S. Armed Forces.
(7) Application for Citizenship and
Issuance of Certificate Under Section
322, Form N–600K. For filing an
application for citizenship and issuance
of certificate under section 322 of the
Act: $960.
(c) G Forms, Statutory Fees, and NonForm Fees—(1) Genealogy Index Search
Request, Form G–1041: $240. The fee is
due regardless of the search results.
(2) Genealogy Records Request, Form
G–1041A: $385. USCIS will refund the
records request fee when it is unable to
locate any file previously identified in
response to the index search request.
(3) USCIS Immigrant Fee. For DHS
domestic processing and issuance of
required documents after an immigrant
visa is issued by the U.S. Department of
State: $200.
(4) American Competitiveness and
Workforce Improvement Act (ACWIA)
fee. For filing certain H–1B petitions as
described in 8 CFR 214.2(h)(19) and
USCIS form instructions: $1,500 or
$750.
(5) Fraud detection and prevention
fee. (i) For filing certain H–1B and L
petitions as described in 8 U.S.C.
1184(c) and USCIS form instructions:
$500.
(ii) For filing certain H–2B petitions
as described in 8 U.S.C. 1184(c) and
USCIS form instructions: $150.
(6) Fraud detection and prevention fee
for CNMI. For employer petitions in
CNMI as described in Public Law 115–
218 and USCIS form instructions: $50.
(7) CNMI education funding fee. The
fee amount will be as prescribed in the
form instructions and:
(i) The fee amount must be paid in
addition to, and in a separate remittance
from, other filing fees;
(ii) Every employer who is issued a
permit must pay the education funding
fee every year;
(iii) An employer who is issued a
permit with a validity period of longer
than 1 year must pay the fee for each
year of requested validity at the time the
permit is requested;
(iv) Beginning in FY 2020, the fee may
be adjusted once per year by notice in
the Federal Register based on the
amount of inflation according to the
Consumer Price Index for All Urban

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
(v) An agreement between the U.S.
government and another nation or
nations; or
(vi) USCIS error.
(2) The Director may not approve an
exception to the requirements under
paragraph (d) of this section. An
applicant, petitioner, or requestor may
not directly submit a request that the
Director exercise this authority. This
discretionary authority may be
delegated only to the USCIS Deputy
Director.
(c) Director’s exception. The Director
of USCIS may authorize the waiver, in
whole or in part, of a form fee required
by 8 CFR 106.2 that is not otherwise
waivable under this section, if the
Director determines that such action is
an emergent circumstance, or if a major
natural disaster has been declared in
accordance with 44 CFR part 206,
subpart B. This discretionary authority
may be delegated only to the USCIS
Deputy Director. The Director may not
waive the requirements of paragraph (d)
of this section.
(d) Eligibility for fee waiver. A waiver
of fees is limited to an alien with an
§ 106.3 Fee waivers and exemptions.
annual household income at or below
(a) Fee waiver. No fee relating to any
benefit request submitted to USCIS may 125 percent of the Federal Poverty
be waived except as provided by section Guidelines as updated periodically in
the Federal Register by the U.S.
245(l)(7) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1255(l)(7),
Department of Health and Human
any other law, or by regulation.
Services under the authority of 42
Specifically, the following categories of
requestors may apply for a waiver of any U.S.C. 9902(2). In addition, a waiver of
fees as provided in paragraphs (b) and
fees for an immigration benefit and any
associated filing up to and including an (c) of this section may not be provided
to a requestor who is seeking an
application for adjustment of status:
(1) Violence Against Women Act
immigration benefit for which he or she:
(VAWA) self-petitioners as defined
(1) Is subject the affidavit of support
under INA 101(a)(51);
requirements under section 213A of the
(2) T nonimmigrants;
Act, U.S.C. 1183a or is already a
(3) U nonimmigrants;
sponsored immigrant as defined in 8
(4) Battered spouses of A, G, E–3, or
CFR 213a.1; or
H nonimmigrants;
(2) Is subject to the public charge
(5) Battered spouses or children of a
inadmissibility ground under section
lawful permanent resident or U.S.
212(a)(4) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(4).
citizen as provided under INA
(e) Form required. A person must
240A(b)(2); and
submit a request for a fee waiver on the
(6) Applicants for Temporary
form prescribed by USCIS in accordance
Protected Status.
(b) Director’s exemption for individual with the instructions on the forms.
(f) Exemptions. The Director of USCIS
requests. (1) The Director of USCIS may
may provide an exemption for any fee
authorize a waiver on an individual,
case-by-case basis of a form fee required required by 8 CFR 106.2. This
discretionary authority may only be
by 8 CFR 106.2 that is not otherwise
delegated to the USCIS Deputy Director.
waivable under this section if the
The Director must determine that such
Director determines that such action
action would be in the public interest,
would be in the public interest, the
the action is consistent with the
action is consistent with other
applicable law, and the waiver is related applicable law, and the exemption is
related to one of the following:
to one of the following:
(1) Asylees;
(i) Asylees;
(2) Refugees;
(ii) Refugees;
(3) National security;
(iii) National security;
(4) Emergencies or major disasters
(iv) Emergencies or major disasters
declared in accordance with 44 CFR
declared in accordance with 44 CFR
part 206, subpart B;
part 206, subpart B;

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Consumers (CPI–U) since the fee was set
by law at $200 on July 24, 2018.
(8) 9–11 Response and Biometric
Entry-Exit Fee for H–1B Visa. For all
petitioners filing an H–1B petition who
employ 50 or more employees in the
United States if more than 50 percent of
the petitioner’s employees in the
aggregate are in H–1B, L–1A or L–1B
nonimmigrant status, except for
petitioners filing an amended petition
without an extension of stay request:
$4,000. This fee will apply to petitions
filed on or before September 30, 2027.
(9) 9–11 Response and Biometric
Entry-Exit Fee for L–1 Visa. For all
petitioners filing an L–1 petition who
employ 50 or more employees in the
United States, if more than 50 percent
of the petitioner’s employees in the
aggregate are in H–1B, L–1A or L–1B
nonimmigrant status, except for
petitioners filing an amended petition
without an extension of stay request:
$4,500. This fee will apply to petitions
filed on or before September 30, 2027.
(10) Claimant under section 289 of the
Act. No fee.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

PO 00000

Frm 00085

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62363

(5) An agreement between the U.S.
government and another nation or
nations; or
(6) USCIS error.
(g) Documentation of gross household
income. A person submitting a request
for a fee waiver must submit the
following documents as evidence of
annual gross household income:
(1) A transcript(s) from the United
States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) of
the person’s IRS Form 1040, U.S.
Individual Income Tax Return;
(2) If the person was not required to
file a Federal income tax return, he or
she must submit their most recent IRS
Form W–2, Wage and Tax Statement,
Form 1099G, Certain Government
Payments, or Social Security Benefit
Form SSA–1099, if applicable;
(3) If the person filed a Federal
income tax return, and has recently
changed employment or had a change in
salary, the person must also submit
copies of consecutive pay statements
(stubs) for the most recent month or
longer;
(4) If the person does not have income
and has not filed income tax returns, he
or she must submit documentation from
the IRS that indicates that no Federal
income tax transcripts and no IRS Form
W–2s were found.
§ 106.4

Premium processing service.

(a) General. A person submitting a
request to USCIS may request 15
business-day processing of certain
employment-based immigration benefit
requests.
(b) Submitting a request. A request
must be submitted on the form
prescribed by USCIS and prepared and
submitted in accordance with the form
instructions. If the request for premium
processing is submitted together with
the underlying benefit request, all
required fees in the correct amount must
be paid.
(c) Fee amount. The fee amount will
be prescribed in the form instructions
and:
(1) Must be paid in addition to, and
in a separate remittance from, other
filing fees.
(2) May be adjusted once per year by
notice in the Federal Register based on
the amount of inflation according to the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) since the
fee was set by law at $1,000 on June 1,
2001.
(d) 15-day limitation. USCIS will
refund the premium processing service
fee, but continue to process the case if:
(1) USCIS does not issue a notice of
any adjudicative action by the end of
the 15th business day from the date
USCIS accepted a properly filed request
for premium processing for an eligible

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62364

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

employment-based immigration benefit
request, including all required fees. The
adjudicative action is evidenced by the
notification of, but not necessarily
receipt of, an approval, denial, request
for evidence (RFE) or notice of intent to
deny (NOID); or
(2) USCIS does not issue a notice of
a subsequent adjudicative action by the
end of the 15th business-day from the
date USCIS received the response to an
RFE or NOID. In premium processing
cases where USCIS issues an RFE or
NOID within 15 business days from the
initial date of acceptance, a new 15-day
period begins on the date that USCIS
receives the response to the RFE or
NOID.
(3) USCIS may retain the premium
processing fee and not reach a
conclusion on the request within 15
business days, and not notify the person
who filed the request, if USCIS opens an
investigation for fraud or
misrepresentation relating to the benefit
request.
(e) Requests eligible for premium
processing. (1) USCIS will designate the
categories of employment-based benefit
requests that are eligible for premium
processing.
(2) USCIS will announce by its official
internet website, currently http://
www.uscis.gov, those requests for which
premium processing may be requested,
the dates upon which such availability
commences and ends, and any
conditions that may apply.
§ 106.5

Authority to certify records.

The Director of USCIS, or such
officials as he or she may designate, may
certify records when authorized under 5
U.S.C. 552 or any other law to provide
such records.
§ 106.6

DHS severability.

The provisions of this part are
separate and severable from one
another. If any provision is stayed or
determined to be invalid, the remaining
provisions will continue in effect.
PART 204—IMMIGRANT PETITIONS
11. The authority citation for part 204
continues to read as follows:

■

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1151,
1153, 1154, 1182, 1184, 1186a, 1255, 1641; 8
CFR part 2.

12. Section 204.3 is amended:
■ a. In paragraph (b), in the definition of
‘‘Orphan petition’’, by revising the
second sentence;
■ b. By revising the fourth fifth
sentences of paragraph (d) introductory
text; and
■ c. By revising paragraphs (h)(3)(i) and
(ii) and (h)(7) and (13).
■

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

The revisions read as follows:
§ 204.3 Orphan cases under section
101(b)(1)(F) of the Act (non-Hague Adoption
Convention cases).

*

*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
Orphan petition means * * * The
petition must be completed in
accordance with the form’s instructions
and submitted with the required
supporting documentation and, if there
is not a pending, or currently valid and
approved advanced processing
application, the fee as required in 8 CFR
106.2. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * * If the prospective adoptive
parents fail to file the orphan petition
within the approval validity period of
the advanced processing application,
the advanced processing application
will be deemed abandoned pursuant to
paragraph (h)(7) of this section. If the
prospective adoptive parents file the
orphan petition after the approval
period of the advanced processing
application has expired, the petition
will be denied pursuant to paragraph
(h)(13) of this section. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(3) * * *
(i) If the advanced processing
application is approved, the prospective
adoptive parents will be advised in
writing. A notice of approval expires 15
months after the date on which USCIS
received the FBI response on the
applicant’s, and any additional adult
member of the household’s, biometrics,
unless approval is revoked. If USCIS
received the responses on different
days, the 15-month period begins on the
earliest response date. The notice of
approval will specify the expiration
date. USCIS may extend the validity
period for the approval of a Form I–
600A as provided in paragraph (h)(3)(ii)
of this section or if requested in
accordance with 8 CFR 106.2(a)(23).
During this time, the prospective
adoptive parents may file an orphan
petition for one orphan without fee. If
the Form I–600A approval is for more
than one orphan, the prospective
adoptive parents may file a petition for
each of the additional children, to the
maximum number approved. If the
orphans are birth siblings, no additional
fee is required. If the orphans are not
birth siblings, an additional fee is
required for each orphan beyond the
first orphan. Approval of an advanced
processing application does not
guarantee that the orphan petition will
be approved.
(ii) If the USCIS Director, or an officer
designated by the USCIS Director,

PO 00000

Frm 00086

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

determines that the ability of a
prospective adoptive parent to timely
file a petition has been adversely
affected by the outbreak of a public
health or other emergency in a foreign
country, such Director or designated
officer may extend the validity period of
the approval of the advance processing
application, either in an individual case
or for a class of cases. An extension of
the validity of the approval of the
advance processing application may be
subject to such conditions as the USCIS
Director, or officer designated by the
USCIS Director may establish.
*
*
*
*
*
(7) Advanced processing application
deemed abandoned for failure to file
orphan petition within the approval
validity period of the advanced
processing application. If an orphan
petition is not properly filed within 15
months of the approval date of the
advanced processing application, the
application will be deemed abandoned.
Supporting documentation will be
returned to the prospective adoptive
parents, except for documentation
submitted by a third party which will be
returned to the third party, and
documentation relating to the
fingerprint checks. The director will
dispose of documentation relating to
biometrics checks in accordance with
current policy. Such abandonment will
be without prejudice to a new filing at
any time with fee.
*
*
*
*
*
(13) Orphan petition denied:
Petitioner files orphan petition after the
approval of the advanced processing
application has expired. If the petitioner
files the orphan petition after the
advanced processing application has
expired, the petition will be denied.
This action will be without prejudice to
a new filing at any time with fee.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 13. Section 204.5 is amended:
■ a. In the definition of ‘‘Petition’’ in
paragraph (m)(5) by removing ‘‘8 CFR
103.7(b)(1)’’ and adding in its place ‘‘8
CFR 106.2’’; and
■ b. By revising paragraph (p)(4).
The revision reads as follows:
§ 204.5 Petitions for employment-based
immigrants.

*

*
*
*
*
(p) * * *
(4) Application for employment
authorization. To request employment
authorization, an eligible applicant
described in paragraph (p)(1), (2), or (3)
of this section must file an application
for employment authorization (Form I–
765), with USCIS, in accordance with 8
CFR 274a.13(a) and the form

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
instructions. Such applicant is subject
to the collection of his or her biometric
information as provided in the form
instructions. Employment authorization
under this paragraph may be granted
solely in 1-year increments, but not to
exceed the period of the alien’s
authorized admission.
*
*
*
*
*

§ 204.313

§ 204.6

PART 211—DOCUMENTARY
REQUIREMENTS: IMMIGRANTS;
WAIVERS

[Amended]

14. Section 204.6 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(XX)’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in paragraph (m)(6)(i)(C).

■

§ 204.310

19. The authority citation for part 211
continues to read as follows:

[Amended]

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1181,
1182, 1203, 1225, 1257; 8 CFR part 2.

15. Section 204.310 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ and
by removing and reserving paragraph
(a)(3)(ii).

§ 211.1

[Amended]

16. Section 204.311 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (u)(4).
■ 17. Section 204.312 is amended by
revising paragraph (e)(3)(i) introductory
text to read as follows:
Adjudication of the Form I–800A.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

*

*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(3)(i) If the 15-month validity period
for a Form I–800A approval is about to
expire, the applicant may file Form I–
800A Supplement 3, with the filing fee
under 8 CFR 106.2, if required. The
applicant may not file a Form I–800A
Supplement 3 seeking extension of an
approval notice more than 90 days
before the expiration of the validity
period for the Form I–800A approval,
but must do so on or before the date on
which the validity period expires. The
applicant is not required to pay the
Form I–800A Supplement 3 filing fee for
the first request to extend the approval
of a Form I–800A, or to obtain a first
time change of Hague Convention
country during the Form I–800A
approval period. If the applicant files a
second or subsequent Form I–800A
Supplement 3 to obtain a second or
subsequent extension or a second or
subsequent change of Hague Convention
country, then, the applicant must pay
the Form I–800A Supplement 3 filing
fee, as specified in 8 CFR 106.2, for the
second, or any subsequent, Form I–
800A Supplement 3 that is filed. Any
Form I–800A Supplement 3 that is filed
to obtain an extension of the approval
of a Form I–800A or a change of Hague
Convention country must be
accompanied by:
*
*
*
*
*

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

[Amended]

20. Section 211.1 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (b)(3).

■

■

§ 204.312

§ 212.15

■

■

§ 204.311

[Amended]

18. Section 204.313 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in the
next to last sentence of paragraph (a)
and by adding the word ‘‘birth’’ before
‘‘siblings’’ in the last sentence of
paragraph (a).
*
*
*
*
*

■

§ 211.2

[Amended]

21. Section 211.2 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (b).

■

PART 212—DOCUMENTARY
REQUIREMENTS: NONIMMIGRANTS;
WAIVERS; ADMISSION OF CERTAIN
INADMISSIBLE ALIENS; PAROLE
22. The authority citation for part 212
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 6 U.S.C. 111, 202(4) and 271;
8 U.S.C. 1101 and note, 1102, 1103, 1182 and
note, 1184, 1185 note (section 7209 of Pub.
L. 108–458), 1187, 1223, 1225, 1226, 1227,
1255, 1359; 8 CFR part 2.
§ 212.2

[Amended]

23. Section 212.2 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraphs (b)(1), (c)(1)(ii), (d), and
(g)(1).

■

§ 212.3

[Amended]

24. Section 212.3 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (a).

■

§ 212.4

[Amended]

25. Section 212.4 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (b).

■

§ 212.7

[Amended]

26. Section 212.7 is amended:
a. By removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in paragraph (a)(1); and
■ b. By removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(5)(i).
■
■

PO 00000

Frm 00087

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62365

[Amended]

27. Section 212.15 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (j)(2)(ii).

■

§ 212.18

[Amended]

28. Section 212.18 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraphs (a)(2).
■ 29. Section 212.19 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(1), (c)(1), (e),
(h)(1), and (j) to read as follows:
■

§ 212.19

Parole for entrepreneurs.

*

*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) Filing of initial parole request
form. An alien seeking an initial grant
of parole as an entrepreneur of a startup entity must file Form I–941,
Application for Entrepreneur Parole,
with USCIS, with the required fee, and
supporting documentary evidence in
accordance with this section and the
form instructions, demonstrating
eligibility as provided in paragraph
(b)(2) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) Filing of re-parole request form.
Before expiration of the initial period of
parole, an entrepreneur parolee may
request an additional period of parole
based on the same start-up entity that
formed the basis for his or her initial
period of parole granted under this
section. To request such parole, an
entrepreneur parolee must timely file
Form I–941, Application for
Entrepreneur Parole, with USCIS, with
the required fee and supporting
documentation in accordance with the
form instructions, demonstrating
eligibility as provided in paragraph
(c)(2) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Collection of biometric
information. An alien seeking an initial
grant of parole or re-parole before
[EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE]
will be required to submit biometric
information. An alien seeking an initial
grant of parole or re-parole may be
required to submit biometric
information.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(1) The entrepreneur’s spouse and
children who are seeking parole as
derivatives of such entrepreneur must
individually file Form I–131,
Application for Travel Document. Such
application must also include evidence
that the derivative has a qualifying
relationship to the entrepreneur and
otherwise merits a grant of parole in the

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62366

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

exercise of discretion. Such spouse or
child will be required to appear for
collection of biometrics in accordance
with the form instructions or upon
request.
*
*
*
*
*
(j) Reporting of material changes. An
alien granted parole under this section
must immediately report any material
change(s) to USCIS. If the entrepreneur
will continue to be employed by the
start-up entity and maintain a qualifying
ownership interest in the start-up entity,
the entrepreneur must submit a form
prescribed by USCIS, with any
applicable fee in accordance with the
form instructions to notify USCIS of the
material change(s). The entrepreneur
parolee must immediately notify USCIS
in writing if he or she will no longer be
employed by the start-up entity or
ceases to possess a qualifying ownership
stake in the start-up entity.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 214—NONIMMIGRANT CLASSES
30. The authority citation for part 214
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 6 U.S.C. 202, 236; 8 U.S.C.
1101, 1102, 1103, 1182, 1184, 1186a, 1187,
1221, 1281, 1282, 1301–1305, 1356, and
1372; sec. 643, Pub. L. 104–208, 110 Stat.
3009–708; Public Law 106–386, 114 Stat.
1477–1480; section 141 of the Compacts of
Free Association with the Federated States of
Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall
Islands, and with the Government of Palau,
48 U.S.C. 1901 note, and 1931 note,
respectively; 48 U.S.C. 1806; 8 CFR part 2.

31. Section 214.1 is amended:
a. By removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in paragraph (c)(1);
■ b. By removing ‘‘§ 103.7 of this
chapter’’ and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR
106.2’’ in paragraph (c)(2);
■ c. By revising paragraph (c)(5); and
■ d. By removing:
■ i. ‘‘a Form I–129’’ and adding in its
place ‘‘an application or petition’’ in the
first sentence of paragraph (j)
introductory text; and
■ ii. ‘‘Form I–129’’ and adding in its
place ‘‘application or petition’’ in the
second and third sentences of paragraph
(j) introductory text.
The revision reads as follows:
■

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

■

§ 214.1 Requirements for admission,
extension, and maintenance of status.

*

*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(5) Decision on application for
extension or change of status. Where an
applicant or petitioner demonstrates
eligibility for a requested extension, it
may be granted at the discretion of

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

USCIS. The denial of an application for
extension of stay may not be appealed.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 32. Amend § 214.2:
■ a. By revising paragraph (e)(8)(iii), the
first sentence of paragraph (e)(8)(iv)
introductory text, paragraphs
(e)(8)(iv)(B), and (e)(8)(v);
■ b. By removing ‘‘Form I–129 and E
Supplement’’ and adding in its place
‘‘the form prescribed by USCIS’’ in
paragraphs (e)(20) introductory text and
in two places in paragraph (e)(21)(i);
■ c. By revising paragraph (e)(23)(viii);
■ d. By removing and reserving
paragraph (e)(23)(xv);
■ e. By removing either ‘‘8 CFR 103.7’’,
‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)’’ or ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’
and adding in their places ‘‘8 CFR
106.2’’ in paragraphs (f)(9)(ii)(F)(1),
(h)(19)(ii), (m)(14)(ii), and (r)(3), (5), and
(13);
■ f. By removing ‘‘Form I–129’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘application or
petition’’ wherever it appears in
paragraphs (h)(1)(i)(B), (h)(6)(vii),
(l)(14)(ii) introductory text, and
(o)(2)(iv)(G);
■ g. By revising paragraphs (h)(2)(i)(A),
(h)(2)(ii), and (h)(5)(i)(B);
■ h. By removing ‘‘I–129’’ and adding in
its place ‘‘the form prescribed by
USCIS’’ in paragraph (h)(6)(iii)(E);
■ i. By removing ‘‘Petition for
Nonimmigrant Worker (Form I–129)’’
and adding in its place ‘‘the form
prescribed by USCIS’’ in paragraph
(h)(19)(vi)(A);
■ j. By revising paragraphs (h)(19)(i),
(m)(14)(ii) introductory text, and
(o)(2)(iv)(F);
■ k. By removing ‘‘Form I–129’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘an application or
petition’’ in the first sentence of
paragraph (o)(12)(i);
■ l. By revising paragraph (p)(2)(iv)(F);
■ m. By removing ‘‘Form I–129’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘application or
petition’’ wherever it appears in
paragraph (p)(2)(iv)(C)(2), the second
sentence of paragraph (q)(3)(i), and
paragraphs (q)(4)(i) and (q)(6);
■ n. By removing ‘‘Form I–129’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘the form prescribed
by USCIS’’ in paragraphs (h)(2)(i)(D),
(h)(5)(i)(A), (h)(11)(i)(A), (h)(14),
(h)(15)(i), (l)(2)(ii), (l)(3) introductory
text, (l)(4)(iv) introductory text,
(l)(5)(ii)(F), (l)(15)(i), (l)(17)(i),
(o)(2)(iv)(D), (p)(13), (p)(14)(i), (q)(4)(iii),
and in the second sentence of paragraph
(q)(5)(i);
■ o. By removing ‘‘Form I–129, Petition
for Nonimmigrant Worker’’ and adding
in its place ‘‘the form prescribed by
USCIS’’ in its place in paragraphs
(l)(2)(i), (l)(5)(ii)(F), (o)(2)(i), (o)(11),
(p)(2)(i), (q)(3)(i), and the first sentence
of paragraph (q)(5)(i);

PO 00000

Frm 00088

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

p. By removing ‘‘Form I–129 petition’’
and adding in its place ‘‘application or
petition’’ in paragraph (p)(2)(iv)(H); and
■ q. By revising paragraph (r)(3)
introductory text and the definition of
‘‘Petitions’’ in paragraph (r)(3) and
revising paragraphs (r)(5), (w)(5),
(w)(14)(iii), and (w)(15).
The revisions read as follows:
■

§ 214.2 Special requirements for
admission, extension, and maintenance of
status.

*

*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(8) * * *
(iii) Substantive changes. Approval of
USCIS must be obtained where there
will be a substantive change in the
terms or conditions of E status. The
treaty alien must file a new application
in accordance with the instructions on
the form prescribed by USCIS
requesting extension of stay in the
United States, plus evidence of
continued eligibility for E classification
in the new capacity. Or the alien may
obtain a visa reflecting the new terms
and conditions and subsequently apply
for admission at a port-of-entry. USCIS
will deem there to have been a
substantive change necessitating the
filing of a new application where there
has been a fundamental change in the
employing entity’s basic characteristics,
such as a merger, acquisition, or sale of
the division where the alien is
employed.
(iv) Non-substantive changes. Neither
prior approval nor a new application is
required if there is no substantive, or
fundamental, change in the terms or
conditions of the alien’s employment
which would affect the alien’s eligibility
for E classification. * * *
(B) Request a new approval notice
reflecting the non-substantive change by
filing an application with a description
of the change, or;
*
*
*
*
*
(v) Advice. To request advice from
USCIS as to whether a change is
substantive, an alien may file an
application with a complete description
of the change. In cases involving
multiple employees, an alien may
request that USCIS determine if a
merger or other corporate restructuring
requires the filing of separate
applications by filing a single
application and attaching a list of the
related receipt numbers for the
employees involved and an explanation
of the change or changes.
*
*
*
*
*
(23) * * *
(viii) Information for background
checks. USCIS may require an applicant
for E–2 CNMI Investor status, including

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
but not limited to any applicant for
derivative status as a spouse or child, to
submit biometrics as required under 8
CFR 103.16.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(2) Petitions—(i) Filing of petitions—
(A) General. A United States employer
seeking to classify an alien as an H–1B,
H–2A, H–2B, or H–3 temporary
employee must file a petition on the
form prescribed by USCIS in accordance
with the form instructions.
*
*
*
*
*
(ii) Multiple beneficiaries. Up to 25
named beneficiaries may be included in
an H–1C, H–2A, H–2B, or H–3 petition
if the beneficiaries will be performing
the same service, or receiving the same
training, for the same period, and in the
same location. If more than 25 named
beneficiaries are being petitioned for, an
additional petition is required. Petitions
for H–2A and H–2B workers from
countries not designated in accordance
with paragraph (h)(6)(i)(E) of this
section must be filed separately.
*
*
*
*
*
(5) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) Multiple beneficiaries. The total
number of beneficiaries of a petition or
series of petitions based on the same
temporary labor certification may not
exceed the number of workers indicated
on that document. A single petition can
include more than one named
beneficiary if the total number is 25 or
less and does not exceed the number of
positions indicated on the relating
temporary labor certification.
*
*
*
*
*
(19) * * *
(i) A United States employer (other
than an exempt employer defined in
paragraph (h)(19)(iii) of this section, or
an employer filing a petition described
in paragraph (h)(19)(v) of this section)
who files a petition or application must
include the additional American
Competitiveness and Workforce
Improvement Act (ACWIA) fee
referenced in 8 CFR 106.2, if the
petition is filed for any of the following
purposes:
*
*
*
*
*
(m) * * *
(14) * * *
(ii) Application. A M–1 student must
apply for permission to accept
employment for practical training on
Form I–765, with fee as contained in 8
CFR part 106, accompanied by a
properly endorsed Form I–20 by the
designated school official for practical
training. The application must be
submitted before the program end date
listed on the student’s Form I–20 but

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

not more than 90 days before the
program end date. The designated
school official must certify on Form I–
538 that—
*
*
*
*
*
(o) * * *
(2) * * *
(iv) * * *
(F) Multiple beneficiaries. More than
one O–2 accompanying alien may be
included on a petition if they are
assisting the same O–1 alien for the
same events or performances, during the
same period, and in the same location.
Up to 25 named beneficiaries may be
included per petition.
*
*
*
*
*
(p) * * *
(2) * * *
(iv) * * *
(F) Multiple beneficiaries. More than
one beneficiary may be included in a P
petition if they are members of a team
or group, or if they will provide
essential support to P–1, P–2, or P–3
beneficiaries performing in the same
location and in the same occupation. Up
to 25 named beneficiaries may be
included per petition.
*
*
*
*
*
(r) * * *
(3) Definitions. As used in this
section, the term:
*
*
*
*
*
Petition means the form or as may be
prescribed by USCIS, a supplement
containing attestations required by this
section, and the supporting evidence
required by this part.
*
*
*
*
*
(5) Extension of stay or readmission.
An R–1 alien who is maintaining status
or is seeking readmission and who
satisfies the eligibility requirements of
this section may be granted an extension
of R–1 stay or readmission in R–1 status
for the validity period of the petition, up
to 30 months, provided the total period
of time spent in R–1 status does not
exceed a maximum of five years. A
Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker to
request an extension of R–1 status must
be filed by the employer with a
supplement prescribed by USCIS
containing attestations required by this
section, the fee specified in 8 CFR part
106, and the supporting evidence, in
accordance with the applicable form
instructions.
*
*
*
*
*
(w) * * *
(5) Petition requirements. An
employer who seeks to classify an alien
as a CW–1 worker must file a petition
with USCIS and pay the requisite
petition fee plus the CNMI education
funding fee and the fraud prevention

PO 00000

Frm 00089

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

62367

and detection fee as prescribed in the
form instructions and 8 CFR part 106. If
the beneficiary will perform services for
more than one employer, each employer
must file a separate petition with fees
with USCIS.
*
*
*
*
*
(14) * * *
(iii) If the eligible spouse and/or
minor child(ren) are present in the
CNMI, the spouse or child(ren) may
apply for CW–2 dependent status on
Form I–539 (or such alternative form as
USCIS may designate) in accordance
with the form instructions. The CW–2
status may not be approved until
approval of the CW–1 petition.
(15) Biometrics and other information.
The beneficiary of a CW–1 petition or
the spouse or child applying for a grant
or, extension of CW–2 status, or a
change of status to CW–2 status, must
submit biometric information as
requested by USCIS.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 214.3

[Amended]

33. Section 214.3 is amended:
a. By removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in paragraph (h)(1)(i); and
■ b. By removing ‘‘8 CFR
103.7(b)(1)(ii)(B)’’ and adding in its
place ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(d)(2)’’ in paragraph
(h)(2) introductory text.
■
■

§ 214.6

[Amended]

34. Section 214.6 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraphs (g)(1), (h)(1)(i), (h)(2), and
(i)(2).

■

§ 214.11

[Amended]

35. Section 214.11 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraphs (d)(2)(iii) and (k)(1).
■ 36. Section 214.14 is amended by
revising paragraphs (c)(1) introductory
text to read as follows:
■

§ 214.14 Alien victims of certain qualifying
criminal activity.

*

*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) Filing a petition. USCIS has sole
jurisdiction over all petitions for U
nonimmigrant status. An alien seeking
U–1 nonimmigrant status must submit,
Form I–918, Petition for U
Nonimmigrant Status, and initial
evidence to USCIS in accordance with
this paragraph and the instructions to
Form I–918. A petitioner who received
interim relief is not required to submit
initial evidence with Form I–918 if he
or she wishes to rely on the law
enforcement certification and other

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62368

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
U.S.C. 1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L.
108–458); Pub. L. 112–54.

evidence that was submitted with the
request for interim relief.
*
*
*
*
*

§ 235.1

PART 216—CONDITIONAL BASIS OF
LAWFUL PERMANENT RESIDENCE
STATUS
37. The authority citation for part 216
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1154, 1184,
1186a, 1186b, and 8 CFR part 2.
§ 216.4

[Amended]

38. Section 216.4 is amended by
removing ‘‘§ 103.7(b) of this chapter’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in paragraph (a)(1).

■

§ 216.5

[Amended]

§ 235.13

40. Section 216.6 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1) of this
chapter ’’ and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR
106.2’’ in paragraph (a)(1).
PART 217—VISA WAIVER PROGRAM
41. The authority citation for part 217
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1187; 8 CFR part
2.
[Amended]

42. Section 217.2 is amended by
removing ‘‘§ 103.7(b)(1)’’ and adding in
its place ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(d)(4)’’ in its place
in paragraph (c)(2).

■

PART 223—REENTRY PERMITS,
REFUGEE TRAVEL DOCUMENTS, AND
ADVANCE PAROLE DOCUMENTS
43. The authority citation for part 223
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1181, 1182,
1186a, 1203, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1251; Protocol
Relating to the Status of Refugees, November
1, 1968, 19 U.S.T. 6223 (TIAS) 6577; 8 CFR
part 2.
[Amended]

44. Section 223.2 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (a).

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

■

50. The authority citation for part 236
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a; 8 U.S.C.
1103, 1182, 1224, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1231,
1362; 18 U.S.C. 4002, 4013(c)(4); 8 CFR part
2.
§ 236.14

[Amended]

51. Section 236.14 is amended by
removing ‘‘§ 103.7(b)(1) of this chapter’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in paragraph (a).

■

§ 236.15

[Amended]

52. Section 236.15 is amended by
removing ‘‘§ 103.7(b)(1) of this chapter’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in paragraph (e).

■

PART 240—VOLUNTARY DEPARTURE,
SUSPENSION OF DEPORTATION AND
SPECIAL RULE CANCELLATION OF
REMOVAL
53. The authority citation for part 240
continues to read as follows:

45. The authority citation for part 235
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101 and note, 1103,
1183, 1185 (pursuant to E.O. 13323, 69 FR
241, 3 CFR, 2004 Comp., p.278), 1201, 1224,
1225, 1226, 1228, 1365a note, 1365b, 1379,
1731–32; Title VII of Public Law 110–229; 8

Jkt 250001

PART 236—APPREHENSION AND
DETENTION OF INADMISSIBLE AND
DEPORTABLE ALIENS; REMOVAL OF
ALIENS ORDERED REMOVED

■

PART 235—INSPECTION OF PERSONS
APPLYING FOR ADMISSION

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

[Amended]

49. Section 235.13 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(ii)(N)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(d)(14)’’
in paragraph (c)(5).

■

[Amended]

VerDate Sep<11>2014

[Amended]

48. Section 235.12 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(ii)(M)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(d)(13)’’
in paragraph (d)(2).

■

§ 223.2

[Amended]

47. Section 235.7 is amended by
removing ‘‘§ 103.7(b)(1) of this chapter’’
and ‘‘§ 103.7(b)(1)’’ and adding in their
place ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(d)(7)’’ in paragraph
(a)(4)(v).

■

■

39. Section 216.5 is amended by
removing ‘‘§ 103.7(b) of this Chapter ’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in paragraph (b).

§ 217.2

§ 235.7

§ 235.12

■

§ 216.6

[Amended]

46. Section 235.1 is amended by
removing ‘‘§ 103.7(b)(1) of this chapter’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR
103.7(d)(3)’’ in paragraphs (g)(1)(iii) and
(g)(2).

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103; 1182, 1186a,
1224, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1251, 1252 note,
1252a, 1252b, 1362; secs. 202 and 203, Pub.
L. 105–100 (111 Stat. 2160, 2193); sec. 902,
Pub. L. 105–277 (112 Stat. 2681); 8 CFR part
2.

54. Section 240.63 is amended by
revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:

■

§ 240.63

Application process.

(a) Form and fees. Except as provided
in paragraph (b) of this section, the

PO 00000

Frm 00090

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

application must be made on the form
prescribed by USCIS for this program
and filed in accordance with the
instructions for that form. An applicant
who submitted to EOIR a completed
Form EOIR–40, Application for
Suspension of Deportation, before the
effective date of the form prescribed by
USCIS may apply with the Service by
submitting the completed Form EOIR–
40 attached to a completed first page of
the application. Each application must
be filed with the required fees as
provided in 8 CFR 106.2.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 244—TEMPORARY PROTECTED
STATUS FOR NATIONALS OF
DESIGNATED STATES
55. The authority citation for part 244
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1254, 1254a note,
8 CFR part 2.
§ 244.6

[Amended]

56. Section 244.6 is amended by
revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:

■

§ 244.6

Application.

(a) An application for Temporary
Protected Status must be submitted in
accordance with the form instructions,
the applicable country-specific Federal
Register notice that announces the
procedures for TPS registration or reregistration and, except as otherwise
provided in this section, with the
appropriate fees as described in 8 CFR
part 106.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 57. Section 244.17 is amended by
revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
§ 244.17

Periodic Registration.

(a) Aliens granted Temporary
Protected Status must re-register
periodically in accordance with USCIS
instructions. Such registration applies to
nationals of those foreign states
designated for more than one year by
DHS or where a designation has been
extended for a year or more. Applicants
for re-registration must apply during the
period provided by USCIS. Reregistration applicants do not need to
pay the fee that was required for initial
registration except the biometric
services fee, unless that fee is waived in
the applicable form instructions, and if
requesting an employment authorization
document, the application fee for an
Application for Employment
Authorization. By completing the
application, applicants attest to their
continuing eligibility. Such applicants
do not need to submit additional

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
§ 245.24

supporting documents unless USCIS
requests that they do so.
*
*
*
*
*

58. The authority citation for part 204
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182,
1255; Pub. L. 105–100, section 202, 111 Stat.
2160, 2193; Pub. L. 105–277, section 902, 112
Stat. 2681; Pub. L. 110–229, tit. VII, 122 Stat.
754; 8 CFR part 2.
[Amended]

59. Section 245.7 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (a).

■

§ 245.10

66. The authority citation for part
245a continues to read as follows:

[Amended]

60. Section 245.10 is amended by
removing ‘‘§ 103.7(b)(1) of this chapter’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in paragraph (c) introductory text.

§ 245.15

[Amended]

61. Section 245.15 is amended:
a. By removing ‘‘§ 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (c)(2)(iv)(A);
■ b. By removing and reserving
paragraph (c)(2)(iv)(B);
■ c. By removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in paragraph (g)(1);
■ d. By removing ‘‘§ 103.7(b)(1) of this
chapter’’ and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR
106.2’’ in paragraph (h)(1);
■ e. By removing and reserving
paragraph (h)(2); and
■ f. By removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in paragraphs (n)(1), (t)(1), and (t)(2)(i).
■
■

§ 245.18

[Amended]

62. Section 245.18 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraphs (d)(1) and (k).

■

§ 245.21

[Amended]

63. Section 245.21 is amended:
a. By removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in the first sentence of paragraph (b) and
removing the second sentence in
paragraph (b); and
■ b. By removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in paragraphs (f), (h), and (i).

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

■
■

§ 245.23

[Amended]

64. Section 245.23 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (e)(1)(i) and by removing and
reserving paragraph (e)(1)(iii).

■

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

PART 245a—ADJUSTMENT OF
STATUS TO THAT OF PERSONS
ADMITTED FOR TEMPORARY OR
PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS
UNDER SECTION 245A OF THE
IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT
■

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1255a and
1255a note.

67. Section 245a.2 is amended by
revising paragraph (e)(3) to read as
follows:

■

§ 245a.2 Application for temporary
residence.

*

*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(3) A separate application must be
filed by each applicant with the fees
required by 8 CFR 106.2.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 68. Section 245a.3 is amended by
revising paragraph (d)(3) to read as
follows:
§ 245a.3 Application for adjustment from
temporary to permanent resident status.

*

*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(3) A separate application must be
filed by each applicant with the fees
required by 8 CFR 106.2.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 69. Section 245a.4 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(5)(iii) to read as
follows:
§ 245a.4 Adjustment to lawful resident
status of certain nationals of countries for
which extended voluntary departure has
been made available.

*

*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(5) * * *
(iii) A separate application must be
filed by each applicant with the fees
required by 8 CFR 106.2.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 70. Section 245a.12 is amended:
■ a. By removing ‘‘Missouri Service
Center’’ and adding in its place
‘‘National Benefit Center’’ in paragraphs
(b) introductory text and (c);
■ b. By revising paragraph (d)
introductory text;

PO 00000

Frm 00091

Fmt 4701

c. By removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in paragraph (d)(1); and
■ d. By removing and reserving
paragraphs (d)(2), (4), and (6).
The revision reads as follows:
■

65. Section 245.24 is amended:
a. By removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in paragraphs (d)(2) and by removing
and reserving paragraph (d)(3); and
■ b. By removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in paragraphs (h)(1)(ii) and (i)(1)(iii) and
by removing and reserving paragraph
(i)(1)(iv).
■
■

PART 245—ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS
TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE

§ 245.7

[Amended]

62369

Sfmt 4702

§ 245a.12

Filing and applications.

*

*
*
*
*
(d) Application and supporting
documentation. Each applicant for LIFE
Legalization adjustment of status must
submit the form prescribed by USCIS
completed in accordance with the form
instructions accompanied by the
required evidence.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 245a.13

[Amended]

71. Section 245a.13 is amended:
a. By removing ‘‘§ 103.7(b)(1) of this
chapter’’ and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR
106.2’’ in paragraph (d)(1); and (e)(1).
■ b. By removing ‘‘Missouri Service
Center’’ and adding in its place
‘‘National Benefit Center’’ in paragraphs
(e) introductory text and (e)(1); and
■ c. By removing ‘‘§ 103.7(b)(1) of this
chapter’’ and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR
106.2’’ in paragraph (e)(1).
■
■

§ 245a.18

[Amended]

72. Section 245a.18 is amended by
removing ‘‘Missouri Service Center’’
and adding in its place ‘‘National
Benefit Center’’ in paragraph (c)(1).

■

§ 245a.19

[Amended]

73. Section 245a.19 is amended by
removing ‘‘Missouri Service Center’’
and adding in its place ‘‘National
Benefit Center’’ in paragraph (a).

■

§ 245a.20

[Amended]

74. Section 245a.20 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (a)(2).

■

§ 245a.33

[Amended]

75. Section 245a.33 is amended by
removing ‘‘§ 103.7(b)(1) of this chapter’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in paragraph (a) and by removing
‘‘Missouri Service Center’’ and adding
in its place ‘‘National Benefit Center’’ in
paragraphs (a) and (b).

■

PART 248—CHANGE OF
NONIMMIGRANT CLASSIFICATION
76. The authority citation for part 248
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1184, 1258;
8 CFR part 2.
§ 248.3

[Amended]

77. Section 248.3 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)’’ and adding
in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in its place

■

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

62370

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

in the introductory text and by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (h) introductory text.
PART 264—REGISTRATION AND
FINGERPRINTING OF ALIENS IN THE
UNITED STATES
78. The authority citation for part 248
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1201, 1303–1305;
8 CFR part 2.
§ 264.2

[Amended]

79. Section 264.2 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (c)(2)(i).

■

§ 264.5

[Amended]

80. Section 264.5 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (a).

■

§ 264.6

[Amended]

81. Section 264.6 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (b).

■

PART 274a—CONTROL OF
EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS
82. The authority citation for part
274a continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1324a; 48
U.S.C. 1806; 8 CFR part 2; Pub. L. 101–410,
104 Stat. 890, as amended by Pub. L. 114–
74, 129 Stat. 599.

83. Section 274a.12 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(9), (13), and (14)
to read as follows:

■

§ 274a.12 Classes of aliens authorized to
accept employment.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

*

*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(9) A temporary worker or trainee (H–
1, H–2A, H–2B, or H–3), pursuant to 8
CFR 214.2(h), or a nonimmigrant
specialty occupation worker pursuant to
section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b)(1) of the Act.
An alien in this status may be employed
only by the petitioner through whom
the status was obtained. In the case of
a professional H–2B athlete who is
traded from one organization to another
organization, employment authorization
for the player will automatically
continue for a period of 30 days after
acquisition by the new organization,
within which time the new organization
is expected to file a new petition for H–
2B classification. If a new petition is not
filed within 30 days, employment
authorization will cease. If a new
petition is filed within 30 days, the
professional athlete’s employment

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

authorization will continue until the
petition is adjudicated. If the new
petition is denied, employment
authorization will cease. In the case of
a nonimmigrant with H–1B status,
employment authorization will
automatically continue upon the filing
of a qualifying petition under 8 CFR
214.2(h)(2)(i)(H) until such petition is
adjudicated, in accordance with section
214(n) of the Act and 8 CFR
214.2(h)(2)(i)(H);
*
*
*
*
*
(13) An alien having extraordinary
ability in the sciences, arts, education,
business, or athletics (O–1), and an
accompanying alien (O–2), pursuant to
8 CFR 214.2(o). An alien in this status
may be employed only by the petitioner
through whom the status was obtained.
In the case of a professional O–1 athlete
who is traded from one organization to
another organization, employment
authorization for the player will
automatically continue for a period of
30 days after the acquisition by the new
organization, within which time the
new organization is expected to file a
new petition for O nonimmigrant
classification. If a new petition is not
filed within 30 days, employment
authorization will cease. If a new
petition is filed within 30 days, the
professional athlete’s employment
authorization will continue until the
petition is adjudicated. If the new
petition is denied, employment
authorization will cease.
(14) An athlete, artist, or entertainer
(P–1, P–2, or P–3), pursuant to 8 CFR
214.2(p). An alien in this status may be
employed only by the petitioner through
whom the status was obtained. In the
case of a professional P–1 athlete who
is traded from one organization to
another organization, employment
authorization for the player will
automatically continue for a period of
30 days after the acquisition by the new
organization, within which time the
new organization is expected to file a
new petition for P–1 nonimmigrant
classification. If a new petition is not
filed within 30 days, employment
authorization will cease. If a new
petition is filed within 30 days, the
professional athlete’s employment
authorization will continue until the
petition is adjudicated. If the new
petition is denied, employment
authorization will cease;
*
*
*
*
*
PART 286—IMMIGRATION USER FEE
84. The authority citation for part 286
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1356; Title
VII of Public Law 110–229; 8 CFR part 2.

PO 00000

Frm 00092

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

§ 286.9

[Amended]

85. Section 286.9 is amended by
removing ‘‘§ 103.7(b)(1)’’ and adding in
its place ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(d)’’ in paragraph
(a).

■

PART 301—NATIONALS AND
CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES AT
BIRTH
86. The authority citation for part 301
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1401; 8 CFR part
2.
§ 301.1

[Amended]

87. Section 301.1 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (a)(1).

■

PART 319—SPECIAL CLASSES OF
PERSONS WHO MAY BE
NATURALIZED: SPOUSES OF UNITED
STATES CITIZENS
88. The authority citation for part 319
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1430, 1443.
§ 319.11

[Amended]

89. Section 319.11 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (a) introductory text.

■

PART 320—CHILD BORN OUTSIDE
THE UNITED STATES AND RESIDING
PERMANENTLY IN THE UNITED
STATES; REQUIREMENTS FOR
AUTOMATIC ACQUISITION OF
CITIZENSHIP
90. The authority citation for part 320
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1443; 8 CFR part
2.
§ 320.5

[Amended]

91. Section 320.5 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraphs (b) and (c).

■

PART 322—CHILD BORN OUTSIDE
THE UNITED STATES;
REQUIREMENTS FOR APPLICATION
FOR CERTIFICATE OF CITIZENSHIP
92. The authority citation for part 322
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1443; 8 CFR part
2.
§ 322.3

[Amended]

93. Section 322.3 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (a) and by removing
‘‘§ 103.7(b)(1) of this chapter’’ and

■

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ (b)(1)
introductory text.

adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (a).

§ 322.5

PART 341—CERTIFICATES OF
CITIZENSHIP

[Amended]

94. Section 322.5 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraphs (b) and (c).

■

99. The authority citation for part 341
continues to read as follows:

■

PART 324—SPECIAL CLASSES OF
PERSONS WHO MAY BE
NATURALIZED: WOMEN WHO HAVE
LOST UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP
BY MARRIAGE AND FORMER
CITIZENS WHOSE NATURALIZATION
IS AUTHORIZED BY PRIVATE LAW
95. The authority citation for part 324
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1435, 1443, 1448,
1101 note.
§ 324.2

[Amended]

Authority: Pub. L. 82–414, 66 Stat. 173,
238, 254, 264, as amended; 8 U.S.C. 1103,
1409(c), 1443, 1444, 1448, 1452, 1455; 8 CFR
part 2.
§ 341.1

[Amended]

100. Section 341.1 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’.

■

§ 341.5

[Amended]

101. Section 341.5 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7’’ and adding in
its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in paragraph (e).

■

PART 343a—NATURALIZATION AND
CITIZENSHIP PAPERS LOST,
MUTILATED, OR DESTROYED; NEW
CERTIFICATE IN CHANGED NAME;
CERTIFIED COPY OF REPATRIATION
PROCEEDINGS

96. Section 324.2 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (b).

■

PART 334—APPLICATION FOR
NATURALIZATION

■

97. The authority citation for part 334
continues to read as follows:

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101 note, 1103, 1435,
1443, 1454, and 1455.

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1443; 8 CFR part
2.

102. The authority citation for part
343a continues to read as follows:

§ 343a.1

[Amended]

103. Section 343a.1 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR part 106’’ in
paragraph (a).

■

§ 334.2

[Amended]

98. Section 334.2 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2

■

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:32 Nov 13, 2019

Jkt 250001

PO 00000

Frm 00093

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 9990

62371

PART 343b—SPECIAL CERTIFICATE
OF NATURALIZATION FOR
RECOGNITION BY A FOREIGN STATE
104. The authority citation for part
343b continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1443, 1454, 1455.
§ 343b.1

[Amended]

105. Section 343b.1 is amended by
removing the term ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’
and adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’
in the first sentence.

■

PART 392—SPECIAL CLASSES OF
PERSONS WHO MAY BE
NATURALIZED: PERSONS WHO DIE
WHILE SERVING ON ACTIVE DUTY
WITH THE UNITED STATES ARMED
FORCES DURING CERTAIN PERIODS
OF HOSTILITIES
106. The authority citation for part
392 continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1440 and note,
and 1440–1; 8 CFR part 2.
§ 392.4

[Amended]

107. Section 392.4 is amended by
removing ‘‘8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘8 CFR 106.2’’ in
paragraph (e).

■

Kevin K. McAleenan,
Acting Secretary .
[FR Doc. 2019–24366 Filed 11–8–19; 4:45 pm]
BILLING CODE 9111–97–P

E:\FR\FM\14NOP2.SGM

14NOP2