60-Day Comment Matrix

Status: Original and derived artifacts are available for this document.

Download: pdf

Form E-Verify+ Extension - Responses to 60-day FRN Public Comments
Public Comments (regulations.gov): USCIS-2023-0011
60-day FRN Citation (federalregister.gov): 91 FR 28616
Publish Dates: May 18, 2026 – July, 17, 2026
Comment ID
1.
0019

Comment Summary
Commenter: Makita Thatcher
1. Meaningful Notice
USCIS should ensure that workers receive clear, plainlanguage notice whenever E-Verify+ produces a
mismatch, tentative nonconfirmation, final
nonconfirmation, unresolved result, case closure,
identity issue, document issue, or work-authorization
issue.

2.
0019

The notice should identify the specific issue, the record
source, the deadline to respond, the steps required to
correct or contest the result, and what the employer
may and may not do while the process is pending.
Commenter: Makita Thatcher
2. Correction before consequence
USCIS should provide meaningful correction procedures
before an E-Verify+ result becomes a final employment
consequence. The process should address errors
involving name changes, transliteration, date of birth,
document numbers, Social Security records, DHS
records, status records, renewed or expired documents,
identity verification, duplicate cases, and data-entry
mistakes.
A person should not lose work because the correction
pathway was unclear, inaccessible, or split across
multiple systems.

USCIS Response
Response: USCIS currently provides the requested
information to employees and employers, in the
Further Action Notice, or FAN. The FANs go through
extensive clearance, including plain language
review, before publication.

Response: USCIS currently provides the requested
information to employees and employers in the
Further Action Notice, or FAN. The FAN provides
the employee the opportunity to correct any errors
before a final nonconfirmation is issued. If a final
nonconfirmation is issued, that is not an
“employment consequence,” but rather DHS
indicating it is unable to confirm an employee’s
employment eligibility after: 1. The employee has
contacted DHS or visited an SSA field office during
the mismatch referral process; 2. The employee
failed to call DHS and/or visit an SSA field office
within 8 federal government working days; or 3. The
employee did not give the employer their decision
whether or not to take action by the end of the 10th
federal government working day after E-Verify
issued the mismatch result. The employer may
terminate employment based on a case result of
final nonconfirmation with no civil or criminal
liability as noted in “Responsibilities of the
Employer,” Article II, Section A, paragraph 13 of the
MOU. See E-Verify Manual Section 3.6, available at
https://www.e-verify.gov/e-verify-user-manual-30case-results/36-final-nonconfirmation. However,
that is a decision made by and the responsibility of
the employer, not DHS.
With respect to data entry errors, an employee may
edit case information before submitting the case.
From the Sign and Submit screen, the user can
correct information before submitting the case.
Employees may also request that the employer
close the case using the Close Case link. A new case
can then be created with the correct information.
When a duplicate case is being created, users

receive a warning and must select the reason for the
duplication from a dropdown.
With respect to correcting errors in federal
databases, such correction methods are set by the
agency which provides such data, not E-Verify.
Instructions on contacting these agencies are
provided in a Further Action Notice (FAN), if
applicable, which an employer may provide in
whichever manner they elect, including digitally,
printed, translated, etc.
3.
0019

Commenter: Makita Thatcher
3. Preservation of the record
USCIS should preserve records sufficient to reconstruct
each E-Verify+ case, including information entered by
the worker or employer, system responses, timestamps,
notices generated, referrals, worker responses,
employer actions, case closures, final determinations,
corrections, and any reopening or later agency action.
If an E-Verify+ result later affects employment,
immigration eligibility, benefits, enforcement, or
adjudication, the affected person and reviewing
authorities should be able to trace the record.

Response: USCIS currently stores the suggested data
for the requisite time period per the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA)
records retention and disposal schedule (N 1-56608-7). Under this schedule, USCIS annually disposes
of E-Verify employer records that are 10 years old or
older. This reduces security and privacy risks
associated with the U.S. government retaining
personally identifiable information. To access such
information beyond the required retention period, a
company’s program administrator or corporate
administrator may download and save a Historical
Records Report, See https://www.e-verify.gov/e-

verify-records-retention-and-disposal-factsheet, to retain such E-Verify case information.
4.
0019

Commenter: Makita Thatcher
4. Employer obligations
USCIS should make employer obligations explicit in
collection instruments, training materials, memoranda
of understanding, and user screens. Employers should
be clearly instructed that they may not terminate,
suspend, reduce hours, delay training, withhold pay, or
otherwise penalize a worker solely because of a
tentative, unresolved, or contested E-Verify+ result.
Employers should preserve proof that notices were
provided and workers had a meaningful opportunity to
correct or contest the result.

5.
0019

Commenter: Makita Thatcher
5. Privacy and limits on secondary use
USCIS should clearly describe what information is
collected, how long it is retained, who may access it,
whether it may be shared with other agencies, and what
limits apply to secondary use.
Information collected for employment verification
should not become an open-ended data pipeline for
unrelated enforcement, benefits, or adjudicatory uses
without clear legal authority, notice, record
preservation, and review.

Response: The requested guidance is currently in
the Terms of Service.
Regarding the request for USCIS to require
employers to preserve required notices, USCIS does
not have the authority to dictate a company’s
internal records retention policies. Form I-9
retention obligations are outlined in 8 CFR
274a.2(b)(2). Guidance on E-Verify records
retention policies can be found on the E-Verify
Records Retention Download Instructions webpage:
https://www.e-verify.gov/e-verify-recordsretention-download-instructions.
Response: With respect to privacy and limits on
secondary use, E-Verify users are informed that
information collected for employment verification is
subject to strict privacy and security controls. The
Form I-9 instructions (PDF) include a Privacy Act
Statement notifying employees that their personal
information may be used in E-Verify.
E-Verify collects only the information necessary to
confirm employment eligibility, as described in the
E-Verify Privacy and Security Statement available at:
https://www.e-verify.gov/key-links/ourcommitment-to-privacy/e-verify-privacy-statement.
Data is retained in accordance with federal records

retention schedules and is accessible only to
authorized personnel for purposes directly related
to employment verification.
Information may be shared with other agencies only
as permitted by law, and any secondary use is
subject to legal authority, notice, and review. EVerify does not allow information collected for
employment verification to be used for unrelated
enforcement, benefits, or adjudicatory purposes
without clear legal authority and appropriate
safeguards.
Users are provided information on privacy
protections through E-Verify privacy resources,
including the agency’s privacy documentation
available at: https://www.e-verify.gov/keylinks/our-commitment-to-privacy.
Additional information can be found in the E-Verify
System of Records Notice, DHS/USCIS-011 E-Verify
Program System of Records, 84 Fed. Reg. 28326
(June 18, 2019), and the E-Verify Privacy Impact
Assessment, DHS/USCIS/PIA-030 E-Verify Program,
available at
https://www.dhs.gov/publication/dhsuscispia-030fe-verify-mobile-app-usability-testing.
6.
0019

Commenter: Makita Thatcher
6. Language access and digital access
E-Verify+ notices, instructions, and correction pathways
should be available in languages commonly used by
affected workers. The system should also account for
workers with limited digital access, limited English
proficiency, disabilities, unstable housing, limited
documentation access, or difficulty navigating multiple
agencies.
A verification system is not meaningful if the correction
process is practically unavailable.

Response: The longstanding policy of USCIS related
to Form I-9 is that it be completed in English. Only
employers located in Puerto Rico may complete the
Spanish-language version of Form I-9 instead of the
English-language version. Any employer may use the
Spanish-language form and instructions as a
translation tool. As a tool to assist employers in
meeting their employment verification obligations,
the same policy applies. See
https://www.uscis.gov/i-9. In addition,
Supplement A of the Form I-9 allows for a translator
or interpreter to assist with completing the Form I9, which provides the data an employer runs in EVerify.
All materials, including Further Action Notices, may
be printed by an employer from E-Verify. Employers
and/or employees are free to enlist interpreter
services, if needed.

7.
0019

Commenter: Makita Thatcher
7. Burden and cost
USCIS should consider the burden on workers, not only
employers or system users. Workers may need to read
notices, contact agencies, gather identity or immigration
records, travel, take time away from work, obtain
assistance, resolve records in multiple systems, or follow
up repeatedly.

Response: Burden estimates determine the average
time it takes a respondent to complete an
information collection, to include time to review
documentation, gathering any required
documentation and information, preparing
statements, and attaching any necessary
documentation. The intent of this information
collection is to create a more secure and less

The burden estimate should include the real-world time
and cost imposed on workers who must correct or
contest E-Verify+ results.

burdensome employment eligibility verification
process overall for employees and employers,
integrating the Form I-9 and E-Verify processes.
The impacted respondents for completion of this
information collection include employers, recruiters,
referrers, state employment agencies; employees;
and record keepers.
Regarding the estimated burden for corrections, this
is covered in the burden estimate accounted for
employees and includes what would be required of
the employee to log back into their account, make
required edits, and then sign and submit the Form I9 for employer examination and completion.

8.
0019

Commenter: Makita Thatcher
8. Aggregate auditability
USCIS should maintain aggregate data on mismatches,
tentative nonconfirmations, final nonconfirmations,
contested cases, corrections, case closures, reopened
cases, employer compliance findings, known error
patterns, language-access needs, average resolution
times, and outcomes after correction.

USCIS acknowledges that some respondents may
take less or more time to complete the employee
sections within I-9NG than the reported estimate
and our time burden analysis may not capture every
applicant’s experience when completing this
information collection. However, to report a time
burden that is higher than the estimate could
overestimate the time burden imposed on
respondents.
Response: E-Verify data is available for internal use,
applicable law enforcement investigations, and for
oversight purposes, as appropriate, such as requests
by Congress. USCIS disagrees that this information
should be publicly available since it contains
Personally Identifiable Information (PII).

This data should be available for oversight so that EVerify+ can be evaluated for accuracy, fairness, privacy,
and burden.

9.
0020
0021
0022

Where federal verification systems affect a person's
ability to work, notice must be specific, correction must
be meaningful, privacy limits must be clear, employer
duties must be enforceable, and the record must be
preserved.
Commenter: Anonymous
Getting hired with a company that uses E-Verify+ is like
getting hired by a company using a ghost to do HR
paperwork. You have no idea how to use the system and
if you look for instructions or help online you won't find
anything. Even if your company has nice human
resources they don't know anything either.
But then if you look for regular I9 information you can
find alot, but none of it is about E-Verify+. Where are
the job protections? How does the government allow an
I9 system but does not tell anyone how to do it? Heaven
forbid you make a mistake when putting the information
inside the E-Verify+ system because some employers will

Response: USCIS appreciates your feedback
regarding your experience with E-Verify+. We
recognize the importance of clear guidance and
accessible resources for both employers and
employees. USCIS continues to work to improve
user support and provide comprehensive
instructions for E-Verify+ through official channels,
including the E-Verify website and user manuals. We
encourage users to consult these resources and
contact E-Verify customer support for assistance.
Your comments regarding system usability and job
protections will be considered as DHS evaluates

say too bad you got to live with the mistake. But The
Social Security Agency then tells you there is nothing for
them to fix. You just need to fix what you put online. But
how do you do that? The E-Verify+ ghost does not tell
you and HR also doesn't know because they don't
understand the information they're told and also can't
find anything online. And by then the company fires you
because they think you are an illegal alien, even though
you were born here and just have a wierd last name.
That did not happen to me but it did happen to my
neighbor.

future enhancements to E-Verify+ and related
guidance materials.

The only reason why I was even able to get my problem
fixed is because I called DOJ of all places. Actually first I
tried calling E-Verify but 10 years later, I was still on
hold. So then I kept looking online and found DOJ does
I9 stuff too. They said I could use a paper I9 and then
called the company and fixed everything. I don't know
how they knew what to fix because the ghost E-Verify+
system does not tell you anything and my HR also did
not understand. But HR was really pumped to have DOJ
there because they had a whole bunch of questions
about other stuff that DOJ answered. I had DOJ on
speaker phone and HR was just rattling off 10 random
questions about other stuff from the USCIS website she
did not understand and boom boom boom boom -- that
DOJ lady answered them all and I thought that HR lady
was going to pee her pants she was so excited. LOL.

10.
0023

11.

0024
0025

I was then able to tell my gf and a neighbor because
they had E-Verify+ problems too although part of it may
be my neighbor is not online that much and so the
computer stuff is harder for him. But how are you
putting stuff on this federal register website instead of
putting it on your normal website? I get that you might
not be trying to make it hard for regular people to work
but I can tell you that you are not making it any easier
and probably are making it harder even if by accident. I
know times in the government are rough but you can't
cut corners and have a ghost E-Verify+ system when jobs
are on the line. Though I know you are just people and
maybe you are the only one left in your office so Thank
You for your service (I am saying that for real).
Commenter: WhoPoo App
Your enforcement arm is not strong enough to enforce
EVerify violations, so this proposal is useless. Maybe hire
more enforcement attorneys who aren't terrified of
being called racist
Commenter: ACCURACY INTL M107
Commenter: MANHIEM AUTO DEALER SUPPLY AND
KELLEY IU BLUE BOOK OF DOD KEVIN M KELLEY OF
KELLEY.IU.EDU
These comments included information and attachments
that were out of scope for this information collection.

Response: This comment was out of scope for this
information collection and did not provide feedback
on the nature of the information collection. This
extension action is to keep this information
collection approved for use under the Paperwork
Reduction Act.

Response: This comment was out of scope for this
information collection and did not provide feedback
on the nature of the information collection. This
extension action is to keep this information

collection approved for use under the Paperwork
Reduction Act.