[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 195 (Wednesday, October 7, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63204-63208]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-20046]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

28 CFR Part 68

[EOIR Docket No. 19-0312; A.G. Order No. 4840-2020]
RIN 1125-AB06


Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer, Chief 
Administrative Law Judge

AGENCY: Executive Office for Immigration Review, Department of Justice.

ACTION: Interim final rule; request for comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Justice (``Department'') is amending the 
regulations governing the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing 
Officer to reflect the creation of the position of Chief Administrative 
Law Judge and make technical corrections.

DATES:  Effective date: October 7, 2020.
    Comments: Electronic comments must be submitted and written 
comments must be postmarked or otherwise indicate a shipping date on or 
before November 6, 2020. The electronic Federal Docket Management 
System at www.regulations.gov will accept electronic comments until 
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on that date.

ADDRESSES: If you wish to provide comment regarding this rulemaking, 
you must submit comments, identified by the agency name and reference 
RIN 1125-AB06 or EOIR Docket No. 19-0312, by one of the two methods 
below:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the website instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Paper comments that duplicate an electronic 
submission are unnecessary. If you wish to submit a paper comment in 
lieu of electronic submission, please direct the mail/shipment to: 
Lauren Alder Reid, Assistant Director, Office of Policy, Executive 
Office for Immigration Review, 5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 1800, Falls 
Church, VA 22041. To ensure proper handling, please reference the 
agency name and RIN 1125-AB06 or EOIR Docket No. 19-0312 on your 
correspondence. Mailed items must be postmarked or otherwise indicate a 
shipping date on or before the submission deadline.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren Alder Reid, Assistant Director, 
Office of Policy, Executive Office for Immigration Review, 5107 
Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041, telephone (703) 305-0289 (not a 
toll-free call).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

    Interested persons are invited to participate in this rulemaking by 
submitting written data, views, or arguments on all aspects of this 
rule via one of the methods and by the deadline stated above. All 
comments must be submitted in English, or accompanied by an English 
translation. The Department also invites comments that relate to the 
economic, environmental, or federalism effects that might result from 
this rule. Comments that will provide the most assistance to the 
Department in developing these procedures will reference a specific 
portion of the rule, explain the reason for any recommended change, and 
include data, information, or authority that support such recommended 
change.
    Please note that all comments received are considered part of the 
public record and made available for public inspection at 
www.regulations.gov. Such information includes personally identifying 
information (such as your name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by 
the commenter.
    If you want to submit personally identifying information (such as 
your name, address, etc.) as part of your comment, but do not want it 
to be posted online, you must include the phrase ``PERSONALLY 
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION'' in the first paragraph

[[Page 63205]]

of your comment and identify the information you want redacted.
    If you want to submit confidential business information as part of 
your comment, but do not want it to be posted online, you must include 
the phrase ``CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION'' in the first paragraph 
of your comment. You must also prominently identify confidential 
business information to be redacted within the comment. If a comment 
has so much confidential business information that it cannot be 
effectively redacted, all or part of that comment may not be posted on 
www.regulations.gov.
    Personally identifying information located as set forth above will 
be placed in the agency's public docket file, but not posted online. 
Confidential business information identified and located as set forth 
above will not be placed in the public docket file. The Departments may 
withhold from public viewing information provided in comments that they 
determine may impact the privacy of an individual or is offensive. For 
additional information, please read the Privacy Act notice that is 
available via the link in the footer of http://www.regulations.gov. To 
inspect the agency's public docket file in person, you must make an 
appointment with the agency. Please see the ``For Further Information 
Contact'' paragraph above for the agency contact information.

II. Purpose of This Rule

A. Chief Administrative Law Judge

    The Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (``OCAHO'') 
is a component of the Executive Office for Immigration Review 
(``EOIR''), which is also an office of the Department of Justice. See 8 
CFR 1003.0(a). An Administrative Law Judge (``ALJ'') in OCAHO has 
jurisdiction to, among other matters, decide cases arising under 
sections 274A, 274B, and 274C of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
(``INA'') (8 U.S.C. 1324a, 1324b, and 1324c).\1\ See generally 28 CFR 
part 68. These cases seek the imposition of civil penalties and other 
remedies against persons or entities alleged to have violated the 
provisions of these sections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ OCAHO ALJs may serve other functions, including the 
adjudication of cases in immigration proceedings under other 
provisions of the INA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department is amending the regulations that govern OCAHO to 
recognize the creation of a Chief Administrative Law Judge (``CALJ'') 
position and to delineate the responsibilities and authorities of the 
CALJ and the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (``CAHO''). In 
addition to serving as an ALJ, the CALJ will serve as the direct 
supervisor of the OCAHO ALJs and related ALJ support staff.\2\ See 
Interim Final Rule at 68.2. In turn, the CAHO will supervise the CALJ. 
Although the CAHO will continue to designate the presiding ALJ in each 
case as an initial matter, the CALJ may reassign ALJs as necessary to 
promote administrative efficiency (e.g., if the previously assigned ALJ 
becomes unavailable or is disqualified). See Interim Final Rule at 28 
CFR 68.26, 68.29, 68.30(c). This interim final rule (``interim final 
rule'' or ``rule'') makes additional technical edits to 28 CFR part 68 
to amend various references to the ``Chief Administrative Hearing 
Officer'' to read ``Chief Administrative Law Judge.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Because the CALJ may serve as an ALJ in a proceeding before 
OCAHO, references to ``ALJ'' in 28 CFR part 68 include the CALJ, 
whenever the CALJ is acting in that capacity. Accordingly, the 
Department believes that the current regulations appropriately 
provide for the CALJ when they reference ``ALJ,'' and, therefore, 
this rulemaking need not amend the regulations in part 68 to 
expressly include ``CALJ'' whenever the regulations provide for the 
authority or role of an ALJ in a proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OCAHO is expanding its reach nationwide to account for an expected 
increase in volume of new case filings, particularly under sections 
274A and 274B of the INA. See, e.g., Immigration and Customs 
Enforcement, ICE Worksite Enforcement Investigations in FY18 Surge 
(Dec. 11, 2018), https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/ice-worksite-enforcement-investigations-fy18-surge (indicating a threefold increase 
in investigations under section 274A in FY 2018); Department of 
Justice, Departments of Justice and State Partner to Protect U.S. 
Workers from Discrimination and Combat Fraud (Oct. 11, 2017), https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/departments-justice-and-statepartner-protect-us-workers-discrimination-and-combat-fraud (outlining a ``Protecting U.S. 
Workers Initiative'' that includes cases brought under section 274B). 
The expansion of OCAHO's ALJ corps nationwide necessitates a CALJ 
position to ensure coordination and appropriate management oversight of 
the corps. The CALJ also further buffers the CAHO's management and 
administrative functions for OCAHO from the supervisory 
responsibilities for the ALJs and ensure that the CAHO does not 
inadvertently create a conflict during the adjudication of a case that 
would later require the CAHO's recusal from conducting any 
administrative review of that adjudication. 28 CFR 68.53, 68.5.
    To further avoid potential recusal issues based on OCAHO's size, 
the interim final rule also clarifies that (1) if an ALJ is 
disqualified from adjudicating a case, the CALJ will reassign the case 
to another ALJ; (2) if the CALJ is disqualified from adjudicating a 
case, the CAHO will reassign the case to another ALJ; and (3) if the 
CAHO is disqualified from reviewing an interlocutory order under 28 CFR 
68.53 or a final order under 28 CFR 68.54, the review will be 
reassigned to the EOIR Director. The interim final rule also clarifies 
that the disqualification procedures for ALJs in 28 CFR 68.30 also 
apply to the CAHO conducting an administrative review under 28 CFR 
68.53 or 68.54.
    Most Federal administrative agencies that utilize ALJs--including 
the other Department component that has ALJs, the Drug Enforcement 
Administration, see Drug Enforcement Administration, Administrative Law 
Judges (last visited Aug. 14, 2020), https://www.dea.gov/administrative-law-judges--have a CALJ position with similar management 
and oversight functions as those assigned to the OCAHO CALJ. See, e.g., 
5 CFR 2421.10 (Federal Labor Relations Authority); 7 CFR 2.27(b) 
(Department of Agriculture); 14 CFR 385.10 (Department of 
Transportation); 20 CFR 404.937 and 416.1437 (Social Security 
Administration); 20 CFR 801.2 (Department of Labor); 30 CFR 44.15 (Mine 
Safety and Health Administration); 40 CFR 305.4 (Environmental 
Protection Agency); 47 CFR 0.351 (Federal Communications Commission). 
The CALJ position is similar to the supervisory immigration judge 
positions in the Office of the Chief Immigration Judge, 8 CFR 
1003.9(a), which assist the Chief Immigration Judge with the management 
and supervision of the immigration judges nationally.

B. Technical Changes

    This rule makes technical changes at 28 CFR 68.15, 68.23, 68.33, 
68.55, and 68.57. These provisions contain outdated references to the 
former Immigration and Naturalization Service (``INS''). The Homeland 
Security Act of 2002, Public Law 207-296, 116 Stat. 2135, as amended, 
transferred the responsibilities of the INS to the newly created 
Department of Homeland Security (``DHS''). Accordingly, the Department 
is updating these references to reflect the current agency 
organization.
    This rule also italicizes defined terms in 28 CFR 68.2 to improve 
clarity, makes stylistic changes in 28 CFR 68.2 to improve clarity, and 
amends a typographical error in the cross-reference at 28 CFR 
68.33(d)(iv).

[[Page 63206]]

III. Regulatory Requirements

A. Administrative Procedure Act

    The Department has determined that this rule is not subject to the 
general requirements of notice and comment and a 30-day delay in the 
effective date. The requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553 do not apply to these 
regulatory changes creating the CALJ position because it is a rule of 
``agency organization, procedure, or practice.'' 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A). 
The Department also finds good cause to issue the technical changes 
without notice and comment, as those procedures are unnecessary. 5 
U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and (d)(3). These changes are non-substantive. They 
simply reflect the current government organization as determined by 
Congress in 2002 and follow other similar amendments by the Department 
to the regulations governing EOIR. See, e.g., 77 FR 59567, 59569 (Sep. 
28, 2012) (describing similar updated references to DHS in chapter V of 
8 CFR).
    The Department is nonetheless promulgating this rule as an interim 
rule, providing the public with opportunity for post-promulgation 
comment before the Department issues a final rule on these matters.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department has reviewed this regulation in accordance with the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), and has determined that 
this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities.

C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This rule will not result in the expenditure by State, local, and 
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 
million or more in any one year, and it will not significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed 
necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 
1995.

D. Congressional Review Act

    This rule is not a major rule as defined by section 804 of the 
Congressional Review Act. 5 U.S.C. 804. This action pertains to agency 
management or personnel and is a rule of agency organization that does 
not substantially affect the rights or obligations of non-agency 
parties. Accordingly, it is not a ``rule'' as that term is used in 5 
U.S.C. 804(3). Further, this rule will not result in an annual effect 
on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or 
prices; or significant adverse effects on competition, employment, 
investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United 
States-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises in 
domestic and export markets. Therefore, the reports to Congress and the 
Government Accountability Office specified by 5 U.S.C. 801 are not 
required.

E. Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, and Executive Order 
13771 (Regulatory Planning and Review)

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all 
costs and benefits of available regulatory 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). 
Executive Order 13563 also emphasizes the importance of using the best 
available methods to quantify costs and benefits, and of reducing 
costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility. Executive Order 
13771 directs agencies to reduce regulation and control regulatory 
costs and, for all qualifying regulations, to identify at least two 
existing regulations for elimination. Notably, the requirements in 
Executive Order 13771 do not apply to regulations involving agency 
organization, management, or personnel.
    Because this rule is limited to agency organization, management, or 
personnel matters, it is not subject to review by the Office of 
Management and Budget pursuant to section 3(d)(3) of Executive Order 
12866. Further, because this rule is one of internal organization, 
management, or personnel, it is not subject to the requirements of 
Executive Orders 13563 and 13771.

F. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    This rule will 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 rule does not have 
sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a 
federalism summary impact statement.

G. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

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

H. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not propose new or revisions to existing 
``collection[s] of information'' as that term is defined under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pubic Law 104-13, 44 U.S.C. chapter 
35, and its implementing regulations, 5 CFR part 1320.

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 68

    Administrative practice and procedure, Aliens, Citizenship and 
naturalization, Civil Rights, Discrimination in employment, Employment, 
Equal employment opportunity, Immigration, Nationality, Non-
discrimination.

    Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, part 68 of 
chapter I of title 28 is amended as follows:

PART 68--RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE 
HEARINGS BEFORE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES IN CASES INVOLVING 
ALLEGATIONS OF UNLAWFUL EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS, UNFAIR IMMIGRATION-
RELATED EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES, AND DOCUMENT FRAUD

0
1. The authority citation for part 68 continues to read as fol1ows:

    Authority:  5 U.S.C. 301, 554; 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1324a, 1324b, and 
1324c; Pub. L. 101-410, 104 Stat. 890, as amended by Pub. L. 104-
134, 110 Stat. 1321.


0
2. Amend Sec.  68.2 by:
0
a. Revising the definition of ``Chief Administrative Hearing Officer,''
0
b. Adding a definition for ``Chief Administrative Law Judge'' in 
alphabetical order; and
0
c. Revising the definitions of ``complainant'' and ``pleading''.
    The revisions and addition read as follows:


Sec.  68.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Chief Administrative Hearing Officer is the official who, under the 
Director, Executive Office for Immigration Review, exercises 
administrative supervision over the Chief Administrative Law Judge and 
others assigned to the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing 
Officer (OCAHO). Subject to the supervision of the Director, the Chief 
Administrative Hearing Officer shall be responsible for the management 
and direction of hearings and duties within the jurisdiction of OCAHO. 
The Chief Administrative Hearing Officer shall have no authority to 
direct the result of an adjudication assigned to an administrative law 
judge unless done so

[[Page 63207]]

in accordance with the review process in this part, provided, however, 
that nothing in this part otherwise shall be construed to limit the 
authority of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer to carry out his 
or her duties. In coordination with the Director, and following 
consultation with the Chief Administrative Law Judge, the Chief 
Administrative Hearing Officer is authorized to:
    (1) Advise the Office of Policy on the issuance of operational 
instructions and policy, including procedural instructions regarding 
the implementation of new statutory or regulatory authorities;
    (2) Advise the Office of Policy on the provision of appropriate 
training of the administrative law judges and other OCAHO staff on the 
conduct of their authorities and duties;
    (3) Direct the conduct of employees assigned to OCAHO to ensure the 
efficient disposition of all pending cases, including the authority to 
regulate the initial assignment of administrative law judges to cases 
and to set priorities or time frames for the resolution of cases;
    (4) Evaluate the activities performed by OCAHO by making 
appropriate reports and inspections, and taking corrective action where 
needed, provided that nothing in this part shall be construed as 
providing for the performance evaluation of an administrative law 
judge;
    (5) Adjudicate cases on administrative review, as provided in this 
part; and
    (6) Exercise such other authorities as the Director may provide;
    Chief Administrative Law Judge means an Administrative Law Judge 
who, in addition to performing the general duties of an Administrative 
Law Judge, serves as the immediate supervisor of all other 
Administrative Law Judges in the Office of the Chief Administrative 
Hearing Officer and performs other regulatory duties as identified in 
this part and elsewhere. Subject to the supervision of the Director and 
the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer, the Chief Administrative Law 
Judge shall be responsible for the supervision, direction, and 
scheduling of the administrative law judges in the conduct of the 
hearings and duties assigned to them. The Chief Administrative Law 
Judge shall have no authority to direct the result of an adjudication 
assigned to another Administrative Law Judge, provided, however, that 
nothing in this part shall otherwise be construed to limit the 
authority of the Chief Administrative Law Judge to carry out his or her 
duties. In coordination with the Director and the Chief Administrative 
Hearing Officer, the Chief Administrative Law Judge is authorized to:
    (1) Advise the Office of Policy on the issuance of operational 
instructions and policy, including procedural instructions regarding 
the implementation of new statutory or regulatory authorities;
    (2) Advise the Office of Policy on the provision of appropriate 
training of the administrative law judges and other OCAHO staff on the 
conduct of their authorities and duties;
    (3) Direct the conduct of employees assigned to an administrative 
law judge team in OCAHO to ensure the efficient disposition of all 
pending cases, including the authority to regulate the assignment of 
administrative law judges to cases to promote administrative efficiency 
and the authority to set priorities or time frames for the resolution 
of cases;
    (4) Evaluate the activities performed by administrative law judge 
teams by making appropriate reports and inspections, and take 
corrective action where needed, provided that nothing in this part 
shall be construed as providing for the performance evaluation of an 
administrative law judge;
    (5) Adjudicate cases as an administrative law judge; and
    (6) Exercise such other authorities as the Director or Chief 
Administrative Hearing Officer may provide;
    Complainant means the Department of Homeland Security in cases 
arising under sections 274A and 274C of the INA. In cases arising under 
section 274B of the INA, ``complainant'' means the Special Counsel (as 
defined in this section), and also includes the person or entity who 
has filed a charge with the Special Counsel, or, in private actions, an 
individual or private organization;
* * * * *
    Pleading means the complaint, the answer thereto, any motions, any 
supplements or amendments to any motions or amendments, and any reply 
that may be permitted to any answer, supplement, or amendment submitted 
to the Administrative Law Judge or, when no judge is assigned, the 
Chief Administrative Law Judge;
* * * * *

0
3. Amend Sec.  68.3 by revising paragraphs (a) introductory text and 
(c) to read as follows:


Sec.  68.3  Service of complaint, notice of hearing, written orders, 
and decisions.

    (a) Service of complaint, notice of hearing, written orders, and 
decisions shall be made by the Office of the Chief Administrative 
Hearing Officer, the Chief Administrative Law Judge, or the 
Administrative Law Judge to whom the case is assigned either:
* * * * *
    (c) In circumstances where the Office of the Chief Administrative 
Hearing Officer, the Chief Administrative Law Judge, or the 
Administrative Law Judge encounters difficulty with perfecting service, 
the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer, the Chief Administrative Law 
Judge, or the Administrative Law Judge may direct that a party execute 
service of process.

0
4. Amend Sec.  68.8 by revising paragraphs (b) and (c)(2) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  68.8  Time computations.

* * * * *
    (b) Computation of time for filing by mail. Pleadings are not 
deemed filed until received by the Office of the Chief Administrative 
Hearing Officer, the Chief Administrative Law Judge, or the 
Administrative Law Judge assigned to the case.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) Whenever a party has the right or is required to take some 
action within a prescribed period after the service upon such party of 
a pleading, notice, or other document (other than a complaint or a 
subpoena) and the pleading, notice, or document is served by ordinary 
mail, five (5) days shall be added to the prescribed period unless the 
compliance date is otherwise specified by the Chief Administrative 
Hearing Officer, the Chief Administrative Law Judge, or the 
Administrative Law Judge.


Sec.  68.15  [Amended]

0
5. Amend Sec.  68.15 by removing the words ``Immigration and 
Naturalization Service'' and adding in their place the words 
``Department of Homeland Security''.

0
6. Revise Sec.  68.26 to read as follows:


Sec.  68.26  Designation of Administrative Law Judge.

    Hearings shall be held before an Administrative Law Judge appointed 
under 5 U.S.C. 3105 and assigned to the Department of Justice. The 
presiding judge in any case shall be initially designated by the Chief 
Administrative Hearing Officer. The Chief Administrative Law Judge may 
reassign a case previously assigned to an Administrative Law Judge to 
promote administrative efficiency. In unfair-immigration-related 
employment practice cases, only Administrative Law

[[Page 63208]]

Judges specially designated by the Attorney General as having special 
training respecting employment discrimination may be chosen by the 
Chief Administrative Hearing Officer or Chief Administrative Law Judge 
to preside.


Sec.  68.29  [Amended]

0
7. Amend Sec.  68.29 by removing the words ``Hearing Officer'' and 
adding in their place the words ``Law Judge''.

0
8. Amend Sec.  68.30 by:
0
a. Removing the words ``Hearing Officer'' and adding in their place the 
words ``Law Judge'' in paragraphs (a) and (c); and
0
b. Adding paragraphs (d) and (e).
    The additions read as follows:


Sec.  68.30  Disqualification.

* * * * *
    (d) In the event of disqualification or recusal of the Chief 
Administrative Law Judge as provided in this section, the Chief 
Administrative Hearing Officer shall refer the matter to another 
Administrative Law Judge for further proceedings.
    (e) The disqualification procedures in this section apply to 
reviews by the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer conducted under 
Sec.  68.53 or Sec.  68.54. In the event of disqualification or recusal 
of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer as provided in this 
section, the review shall be referred to the Director for further 
proceedings. For a case referred to the Director under this paragraph 
(e), the Director shall exercise delegated authority from the Attorney 
General identical to that of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer 
as described in Sec.  68.53 or 68.54.


Sec.  68.33  [Amended]

0
9. Amend Sec.  68.33 by:
0
a. Removing in paragraph (c)(3)(iv) the words ``paragraph (e)'' and 
adding in their place ``paragraph (f)''; and
0
b. Removing in paragraph (f) the words ``Immigration and Naturalization 
Service'' and adding in their place the words ``Department of Homeland 
Security''.


Sec.  68.55  [Amended]

0
10. Amend Sec.  68.55 by:
0
a. Removing the words ``Immigration and Naturalization Service'' and 
adding in their place the words ``Department of Homeland Security'' in 
paragraph (b)(1);
0
b. Removing the words ``Commissioner of Immigration and 
Naturalization'' and adding in their place the words ``Secretary of 
Homeland Security'' in four places in paragraph (b); and
0
c. Removing the words ``Commissioner's'' and adding in their place the 
words ``Secretary of Homeland Security's'' once in paragraph (b)(3) and 
twice in paragraph (d)(2).


Sec.  68.57  [Amended]

0
11. Amend Sec.  68.57 by removing the words ``the Immigration and 
Naturalization Service'' and adding in their place the words ``a 
Department of Homeland Security''.

    Dated: September 2, 2020.
William P. Barr,
Attorney General.
[FR Doc. 2020-20046 Filed 10-6-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-30-P