[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 2 (Wednesday, January 4, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 402-602]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-27066]



[[Page 401]]

Vol. 88

Wednesday,

No. 2

January 4, 2023

Part II





Department of Homeland Security





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





8 CFR Part 103, 106, et al.





U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Fee Schedule and Changes to 
Certain Other Immigration Benefit Request Requirements; Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 88 , No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 2023 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 402]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

8 CFR Parts 103, 106, 204, 212, 214, 240, 244, 245, 245a, 264 and 
274a

[CIS No. 2687-21; DHS Docket No. USCIS 2021-0010]
RIN 1615-AC68


U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Fee Schedule and 
Changes to Certain Other Immigration Benefit Request Requirements

AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: 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 its costs have 
increased considerably since its previous fee adjustment due to 
expanded humanitarian programs, higher demand, increased processing 
times, and a need for more USCIS employees. USCIS cannot maintain 
adequate service levels with the effects of the budget cuts and its 
current level of spending without lasting impacts on operations. DHS 
proposes to adjust USCIS fees, add new fees for certain benefit 
requests, establish distinct fees for petitions for nonimmigrant 
workers, and limit the number of beneficiaries on certain forms. DHS is 
also proposing additional fee exemptions for certain humanitarian 
categories and changes to certain other immigration benefit request 
requirements. If DHS does not adjust USCIS fees it will not have the 
resources it needs to provide adequate service to applicants and 
petitioners or be able to keep pace with incoming benefit request 
workload, and USCIS processing times and backlogs will not improve. DHS 
intends for this rulemaking to provide the funding required for USCIS 
to improve service levels.

DATES: Written comments must be submitted on this proposed rule on or 
before March 6, 2023. The electronic Federal Docket Management System 
will accept comments before midnight eastern time at the end of that 
day.
    Listening session date: DHS will hold virtual public listening 
sessions during which the public may speak directly to USCIS on the 
questions raised in this proposed rule. A session will be held on 
January 11, 2023 at 2:00 p.m. ET.
    Listening sessions registration date: For an opportunity to provide 
oral comments during the virtual public listening sessions, you must 
register before the listening session in question. For registration 
instructions, see the Public Participation section below.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on the entirety of this proposed 
rule package, identified by DHS Docket No. USCIS-2021-0010, through the 
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
website instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted in a 
manner other than the one listed above, including emails or letters 
sent to DHS or USCIS officials, will not be considered comments on the 
proposed rule and may not receive a response from DHS. Please note that 
DHS and USCIS cannot accept any comments that are hand delivered or 
couriered. In addition, USCIS cannot accept comments contained on any 
form of digital media storage devices, such as CDs/DVDs and USB drives. 
Due to Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), USCIS is also not accepting 
mailed comments at this time. If you cannot submit your comment by 
using https://www.regulations.gov, please contact Samantha Deshommes, 
Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, Office of Policy and Strategy, 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland 
Security, by telephone at (202) 658-9621 for alternate instructions.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Cribbs, Deputy Chief Financial 
Officer, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of 
Homeland Security, 5900 Capital Gateway Drive, Camp Springs, MD 20746; 
telephone 240-721-3000 (this is not a toll-free number). Individuals 
with hearing or speech impairments may access the telephone numbers 
above via TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay 
Service at 877-889-5627 (TTY/TDD).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Public Participation
II. Executive Summary
    A. Summary of Economic Impacts
    B. Summary of Proposed Provisions
    C. Summary of Current and Proposed Fees
III. Basis for the Fee Review
    A. Legal Authority and Guidance
    B. Effect of FY 2022 Appropriations
    C. Immigration Examinations Fee Account
    D. Full Cost Recovery
    E. The Use of Premium Processing Funds Under the Emergency 
Stopgap USCIS Stabilization Act
    F. Fee Review History
    1. Current State of USCIS Fee Schedule Regulations
    2. Previous Fee Rules
    3. Current Fees
IV. Fee-Setting Approach--Reversal of 2020 Fee Rule
V. FY 2022/2023 Immigration Examinations Fee Account Fee Review
    A. USCIS Projected Costs and Revenue
    1. USCIS Budget History
    2. FY 2022/2023 Cost Projections
    a. General Expenses
    b. Payroll
    c. Related Rulemakings
    d. Cost Summary
    3. FY 2022/2023 Revenue Projections
    4. Projected 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
    4. Funding the Asylum Program With Employer Petition Fees
    C. Exclusion of Temporary or Uncertain Programs
    D. Consideration of DACA Rulemaking
    E. Fee-Related Issues for Consideration
    1. Accommodating E-filing and Form Flexibility
    2. Processing Time Outlook
VI. Fee Waivers
    A. Background
    B. The 2020 Fee Rule Fee Waiver Changes
    C. Inability To Pay
    D. USCIS Director's Discretionary Fee Waivers and Exemptions
    E. Requirements To Submit Fee Waiver Form
    F. Form and Policy Changes
    G. Request for Comments
VII. Fee Exemptions
    A. Codification of Benefit Requests With No Fees and Exemptions 
of Certain Categories or Classifications From Fees
    B. Proposed Fee Exemptions
    1. Victims of Severe Form of Trafficking (T Nonimmigrants)
    2. Victims of Qualifying Criminal Activity (U Nonimmigrants)
    3. VAWA Form I-360 Self-Petitioners Derivatives
    4. Conditional Permanent Residents Filing a Waiver of the Joint 
Filing Requirement Based on Battery or Extreme Cruelty
    5. Abused Spouses and Children Seeking Benefits Under CAA and 
HRIFA
    6. Abused Spouses and Children Seeking Benefits Under NACARA
    7. Abused Spouses and Children of LPRs or U.S. Citizens Under 
INA Sec. 240A(b)(2)
    8. Special Immigrant Afghan or Iraqi Translators or 
Interpreters, Iraqi Nationals Employed by or on Behalf of the U.S. 
Government, or Afghan Nationals Employed by or on Behalf of the U.S. 
Government or Employed by the International Security Assistance 
Force and Derivative Beneficiaries
    9. Special Immigrant Juveniles
    10. Temporary Protected Status
    11. Asylees
    12. Refugees
    13. Person Who Served Honorably on Active Duty in the U.S. Armed 
Forces Filing Under INA Sec. 101(A)(27)(K)

[[Page 403]]

    14. Summary of Proposed Fee Exemptions
    C. Request for Comments
VIII. Other Proposed Changes in the FY 2022/2023 Fee Schedule
    A. Clarifying Dishonored Fee Check Re-Presentment Requirement 
and Fee Payment Method
    B. Payment Method
    C. Non-Refundable Fees
    D. Eliminating $30 Returned Check Fee
    E. Changes to Biometric Services Fee
    1. Incorporating Biometric Activities Into Immigration Benefit 
Request Fees
    2. Retaining the Separate Biometric Services Fee for Temporary 
Protected Status
    3. Executive Office for Immigration Review Biometric Services 
Fee
    F. Naturalization and Citizenship-Related Forms
    1. Application for Naturalization (Form N-400) Fee
    2. Request for Reduced Fee (Form I-942)
    3. Military Naturalization and Certificates of Citizenship
    4. Application for Certificate of Citizenship (Form N-600) and 
Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate Under 
Section 322 (Form N-600K)
    5. Proposed Changes to Other Naturalization-Related Application 
Fees
    6. Request for Comments
    G. Fees for Online Filing
    H. 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
    3. INA Sec. 245(i) Statutory Sum
    I. Continuing To Hold Refugee Travel Document Fee for Asylees to 
the Department of State Passport Fee
    J. Form I-131A, Carrier Documentation
    K. Separating Fees for Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant 
Worker, by Nonimmigrant Classification
    1. Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H-1 
Classifications
    2. Form I-129, Petitions for H-2A or H-2B Classifications
    3. Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: L 
Classification
    4. Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: O 
Classifications
    5. Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: E and TN 
Classifications
    6. Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H-3, P, Q, or R 
Classifications
    7. Separating Form I-129 Into Multiple Forms
    8. Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Fees
    9. H-1B Electronic Registration Fee
    L. Premium Processing--Business Days
    M. Permitting Combined Payment of the Premium Processing Fee
    N. 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 and Eligibility Extensions
    b. New Approval Notices
    c. Change of Country
    d. Duplicate Approval Notices
    e. Hague Adoption Convention Transition Cases
    5. Form I-800A, Supplement 3, Request for Action on Approved 
Form I-800A
    O. Immigrant Investors
    1. Immediate Effects of the EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 
2022
    2. Background of the EB-5 Program
    3. Proposed EB-5 Program Fees
    P. Genealogy and Records
    1. Genealogy Search and Records Requests
    2. Request for a Certificate of Non-Existence
    Q. Fees Shared by CBP and USCIS
    R. Form I-881, Application for Suspension of Deportation or 
Special Rule Cancellation of Removal (Pursuant to Section 203 of 
Public Law 105-100 (NACARA))
    S. 9-11 Response and Biometric Entry-Exit Fee for H-1B and L-1 
Nonimmigrant Workers (Pub. L. 114-113 Fees)
    T. Adjusting Fees for Inflation
    U. Miscellaneous Technical and Procedural Changes
IX. Proposed Fee Adjustments to IEFA Immigration Benefits
    A. Impact of Fees
    B. USCIS Fiscal Health
    C. Planned Increases in Efficiency
X. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
    A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and 
Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review)
    B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    D. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 
(Congressional Review Act)
    E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
    F. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
    G. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments)
    H. Paperwork Reduction Act
    I. National Environmental Policy Act
    J. Family Assessment

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

AAPA Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009
ABC Activity-Based Costing
ACWIA American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act
AFM Adjudicator's Field Manual
APEC U.S. Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation
ASC Application Support Center
ASVVP Administrative Site Visit and Verification Program
BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
CAA Cuban Adjustment Act
CBP U.S. Customs and Border Protection
CEQ Council on Environmental Quality
CFO Chief Financial Officer
CFO Act Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990
CNMI Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands
COVID Coronavirus Disease
CPI Consumer Price Index
CPI-U Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers
CPR Conditional Permanent Residents
CRA Congressional Review Act
DACA Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
DCL Dedicated Commuter Lane
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
E.O. Executive Order
EOIR Executive Office for Immigration Review
FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation
FDNS Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate
FOIA Freedom of Information Act
FPG Federal Poverty Guidelines
FY Fiscal Year
GAO U.S. Government Accountability Office
GE General Expenses
GPO Government Publishing Office
HHS U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
HRIFA Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act
IEFA Immigration Examinations Fee Account
ILRC Immigrant Legal Resource Center v. Wolf
INA Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952
INS Immigration and Naturalization Service
IOAA Independent Offices Appropriations Act
IPO Immigrant Investor Program Office
IRFA Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
IRIS Immigration Records and Identity Services
ISAF International Security Assistance Force
LPR Lawful Permanent Resident
NACARA Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act
NAFTA North American Free Trade Agreement
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization
NCE New Commercial Enterprise
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NRC National Records Center
NWIRP Northwest Immigration Rights Project v. United States 
Citizenship and Immigration Services
OAW Operation Allies Welcome
OIG DHS Office of Inspector General
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OP Operating Plan
OPQ Office of Performance and Quality
OPT Optional Practical Training
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
PRC Permanent Resident Card
RAIO Refugee, Asylum, and International Operations Directorate
RAP Resource Allocation Plan
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RFE Request for Evidence

[[Page 404]]

RIA Regulatory Impact Analysis
SAM Staffing Allocation Model
SAVE Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements
SBA Small Business Administration
SBREFA Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
SCOPS Service Center Operations
SEA Small Entity Analysis
SEVP Student and Exchange Visitor Program
SIJ Special Immigrant Juvenile
SOFA Status of Forces Agreement
STEM OPT Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Optional 
Practical Training
TEA Targeted Employment Area
TECRO Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office
TPS Temporary Protected Status
TVPRA William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection 
Reauthorization Act of 2008
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
USCIS U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
USMCA U.S. Mexico-Canada Agreement
VAWA Violence Against Women Act
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-2021-0010 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 https://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 https://www.regulations.gov.
    Registration for listening session: To register and receive 
information on how to attend the virtual public listening sessions, 
please go to: https://www.uscis.gov/outreach/upcoming-national-engagements.
    Docket: For access to the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov 
and enter this rulemaking's eDocket number: USCIS-2021-0010. 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) 2022/2023 Immigration Examinations Fee 
Account (IEFA) Fee Review Supporting Documentation (supporting 
documentation);
     FY 2022/2023 IEFA Fee Schedule Documentation (fee schedule 
documentation);
     FY 2022/2023 IEFA Fee Review Model Documentation (model 
documentation);
     FY 2022/2023 Fee Review Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA); 
and
     FY 2022/2023 Fee Review Small Entity Analysis (SEA).
    You may review these documents on the electronic docket. The 
software \1\ used to compute the immigration benefit request \2\ fees 
and biometric fees \3\ is a commercial product licensed to USCIS that 
may be accessed on-site, by appointment, by calling 240-721-6080.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ USCIS uses commercially available activity-based costing 
(ABC) software, CostPerform, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FAQ: To provide maximum transparency and clarity to the public on 
this proposed rule, DHS has provided a list of frequently asked 
questions and answers (FAQ) that summarize the content and context of 
this rule in an easily readable and understandable summary fashion. We 
have placed the FAQ in the eDocket USCIS-2021-0010, as well as on the 
USCIS website at https://www.uscis.gov/proposed-fee-rule-faqs.

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 budget and revenue 
estimates at the time indicated there would be an average annual 
deficit of $560 million without adjusting fees. DHS issued a final rule 
to adjust the USCIS fee schedule on August 3, 2020, by a weighted 
average of 20 percent, reflecting the results of the FY 2019/2020 USCIS 
fee review. See 85 FR 46788 (2020 fee rule). DHS estimated an average 
annual USCIS deficit of $1,035.9 million. The rule was scheduled to 
become effective on October 2, 2020. However, that rule was 
preliminarily enjoined, and USCIS has not implemented the fees set out 
in the 2020 fee rule.\6\ In this rule, DHS proposes to replace the 2020 
fee rule in its entirety by revising the regulatory changes codified by 
the enjoined 2020 fee rule. Certain changes in the 2020 fee rule are 
proposed to be retained by being republished.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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 
technically relate to an immigration or naturalization benefit. For 
example, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) is solely an 
exercise of prosecutorial discretion by DHS, is not an immigration 
benefit, and is called a ``benefit request'' solely for purposes of 
this rule. Likewise, a request for genealogy records is not a 
request for an immigration benefit. For historic receipts and 
completion information, see USCIS immigration and citizenship data 
available at https://www.uscis.gov/tools/reports-studies/immigration-forms-data.
    \6\ Immigrant Legal Res. Ctr. v. Wolf, 491 F. Supp. 3d 520 (N.D. 
Cal. 2020) (ILRC); Nw. Immigrant Rights Project v. USCIS, 496 F. 
Supp. 3d 31 (D.D.C. 2020) (NWIRP).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    USCIS is primarily funded by fees charged to applicants and 
petitioners for immigration and naturalization benefit requests. 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 or 
petitioners. The focus of this fee review is the fees that DHS has 
established and is authorized by INA section 286(m), 8 U.S.C 1356(m), 
to establish or change, collect, and deposit into the IEFA, which 
comprised approximately 96 percent of USCIS' total FY 2021 enacted 
spending authority; this fee review does not focus on fees that USCIS 
is required to collect but cannot change. This rule also proposes to 
revise the genealogy program fees established under INA section 286(t), 
8 U.S.C. 1356(t), and those funds are also deposited into the IEFA. 
Premium processing funds

[[Page 405]]

established under INA section 286(u), 8 U.S.C. 1356(u) are also IEFA 
fees, but premium processing fees are not proposed to be changed in 
this rule.
    In accordance with the requirements and principles of the Chief 
Financial Officers Act of 1990 (CFO Act), codified at 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. 
Following such reviews, DHS proposes fee adjustments, if necessary, to 
ensure that USCIS fees recover the full cost of operating USCIS as 
authorized by INA section 286(m), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m). USCIS has completed 
a fee review for the FY 2022/2023 biennial period. The primary 
objective of any IEFA 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.
    In addition to the requirements of the CFO Act, there are other 
important reasons for conducting the FY 2022/2023 fee review. The fee 
review:
     Allows for an assessment of USCIS policy changes, staffing 
levels, costs, and revenue and other assessments. 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 
submit comments on 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 $1,868.2 million. This projected 
shortfall poses a risk of degrading USCIS operations funded by the 
IEFA.
    Although this fee schedule represents a 40-percent overall weighted 
average increase to ensure full cost recovery, more than a million 
immigration benefit requestors each year would see no increase or a 
decrease in costs because their benefit requests have no fee, are fee 
exempt, or are fee waived.\7\ In FY 2022/2023, USCIS estimates 
approximately 8 million annual average receipts for workload with fees. 
Of those, USCIS estimates approximately 7 million may pay fees. DHS 
proposes to maintain the current fee waiver policy which was 
established in 2011.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ USCIS uses a 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 40-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 2022/2023 
fee-paying receipts for each immigration benefit type, divided by 
the total fee-paying receipts, is $518. The sum of the proposed 
fees, multiplied by the projected FY 2022/2023 receipts for each 
immigration benefit type, divided by the fee-paying receipts, is 
$725. There is a $207, or approximately 40-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 genealogy fees.
    \8\ See Policy Memorandum, 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, 
available at https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/memos/FeeWaiverGuidelines_Established_by_the_Final%20Rule_USCISFeeSchedule.pdf) (last viewed March 23, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed fees would ensure that IEFA revenue covers USCIS' 
costs associated with adjudicating immigration benefit requests. The 
proposed fee schedule accounts for increased costs to adjudicate 
immigration benefit requests, detect and deter immigration fraud, and 
vet applicants, petitioners, and beneficiaries. See section V.A. of 
this preamble for a discussion of IEFA budget history and cost 
projections for this rulemaking. DHS also proposes to expand fee 
exemptions for certain applicants and petitioners for humanitarian 
benefits. Additionally, DHS proposes to establish distinct fees for 
different categories of petitions for nonimmigrant workers. DHS 
proposes to set 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 will enable USCIS to 
adjudicate these petitions more effectively.

A. Summary of Economic Impacts

    The fee adjustments, as well as changes to the forms and fee 
structures used by USCIS, would result in net costs, benefits, and 
transfer payments. For the 10-year period of analysis of the rule (FY 
2023 through FY 2032), DHS estimates the annualized net costs to the 
public would be $532,379,138 discounted at 3- and 7-percent. Estimated 
total net costs over 10 years would be $4,541,302,033, discounted at 3-
percent and $3,739,208,286 discounted at 7-percent.
    The proposed changes in this rule would also provide several 
benefits to DHS and applicants/petitioners seeking immigration 
benefits. For the Government, the primary benefits include reduced 
administrative burdens and fee processing errors, increased efficiency 
in the adjudicative process, and the ability to better assess the cost 
of providing services, which allows for better aligned fees in future 
regulations. The primary benefits to the applicants/petitioners include 
the simplification of the fee payment process for some forms, 
elimination of the $30 returned check fee, USCIS' expansion of the 
electronic filing system to include more forms, and for many 
applicants, limited fee increases and additional fee exemptions to 
reduce fee burdens.
    Fee increases and other changes in this proposed rule would result 
in annualized transfer payments from applicants/petitioners to USCIS of 
approximately $1,612,133,742 discounted at both 3-percent and 7-
percent. The total 10-year transfer payments from applicants/
petitioners to USCIS would be $13,751,827,819 at a 3-percent discount 
rate and $11,322,952,792 at a 7-percent discount rate.
    Fee reductions and exemptions in this proposed rule would result in 
annualized transfer payments from USCIS to applicants/petitioners of 
approximately $116,372,429 discounted at both 3-percent and 7-percent. 
The total 10-year transfer payments from USCIS to applicants/
petitioners would be $992,680,424 at a 3-percent discount rate and 
$817,351,244 at a 7-percent discount rate.
    The annualized transfer payments from the Department of Defense 
(DoD) to USCIS would be approximately $222,145 at both 3- and 7-percent 
discount rates. The total 10-year transfer payments from DoD to USCIS 
would be $1,894,942 at a 3-percent discount rate and $1,560,254 at a 7-
percent discount rate.

B. Summary of Proposed Provisions

    This proposed rule includes the following proposals:
     Adjusting fees according to the schedule in Tables 1 and 
26.
     Adding new fee exemptions for certain humanitarian 
programs and preserving the fee waiver requirements that are currently 
being followed.
     Removing fee exemptions that are based only on the age of 
the person submitting the request.

[[Page 406]]

     Eliminating the $30 returned check fee.
     Incorporating biometrics costs into the main benefit fee 
and removing the separate biometric services fee.
     Requiring separate filing fees for Form I-485 and 
associated Form I-131 and Form I-765 filings.
     Establishing separate fees for Form I-129, Petition for 
Nonimmigrant Worker, by nonimmigrant classification.
     Revising the premium processing timeframe interpretation 
from calendar days to business days.
     Revising adoption-related requirements, including adding a 
Request for Action on Approved Form I-600A/I-600 (Form I-600A/I-600, 
Supplement 3), and associated fees.
     Revising regulations related to genealogy searches, 
including establishing a fee for Form G-1566, Request for Certificate 
of Non-Existence.
     Miscellaneous technical and procedural changes.
     Creating lower fees for forms filed online.

C. Summary of Current and Proposed Fees

    Table 1 summarizes the current and proposed fees. In addition, the 
proposed fees and exemptions are incorporated into the draft version of 
USCIS Form G-1055 as part of the docket for this rulemaking. In some 
cases, the current or proposed fee may be the sum of several fees. For 
example, several immigration benefit requests require an additional 
biometric services fee under the current fee structure. The table 
includes rows with and without the additional biometric services fee 
added to the Current Fee(s) column. The Current Fee(s) column 
represents the current fees in effect rather than the enjoined fees 
from the 2020 fee rule.\9\ Throughout this proposed rule, the phrase 
``current fees'' refers to the fees in effect and not the enjoined 
fees. In this proposal, DHS would eliminate the additional biometric 
services fee in most cases by including the costs in the underlying 
immigration benefit request fee. As such, the Proposed Fees(s) column 
does not include an additional biometric services fee. Some other 
benefit requests are listed several times because in some cases DHS 
proposes distinct fees based on filing methods, online or paper. DHS 
proposes to require fees for Forms I-131 and I-765 when filed with Form 
I-485. As such, Table 1 includes rows that compare the current fee for 
Form I-485 to various combinations of the proposed fees for Forms I-
485, I-131, and I-765. We grouped the fees into different categories, 
such as Citizenship and Nationality, Humanitarian, Family-Based, 
Employment-Based, and Other. We included immigration benefit requests 
without fees in a No Fees category. DHS proposes to codify these no fee 
immigration benefit requests. See, e.g., proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(58) 
through (60).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ USCIS provides filing fee information on the All Forms page 
at https://www.uscis.gov/forms/all-forms. You can use the Fee 
Calculator to determine the exact filing and biometric services fees 
for any form processed at a USCIS Lockbox facility. See USCIS, Fee 
Calculator, https://www.uscis.gov/feecalculator. For a complete list 
of all USCIS fees, see Form G-1055, Fee Schedule, available from 
https://www.uscis.gov/g-1055.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

BILLING CODE 9111-97-P

[[Page 407]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.000

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

    \10\ These are fees that USCIS is currently charging and not 
those codified by the 2020 fee rule.

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

[[Page 408]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.001


[[Page 409]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.002


[[Page 410]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.003


[[Page 411]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.004


[[Page 412]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.005


[[Page 413]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.006


[[Page 414]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.007


[[Page 415]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.008

BILLING CODE 9111-97-C

III. Basis for the Fee Review

A. Legal Authority and Guidance

    DHS is issuing this proposed rule consistent with INA sec. 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''),\11\ 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This proposed rule is also consistent with non-statutory guidance 
on fees, the budget process, and Federal accounting principles.\12\ 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 
Immigration Examinations Fee Account (IEFA) costs.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See OMB Circular A-25, ``User Charges,'' 58 FR 38142, 
available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Circular-025.pdf (July 15, 1993) (revising Federal policy guidance 
regarding fees assessed by Federal agencies for Government 
services). See also 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 (July 31, 1995). See also OMB Circular A-
11, Preparation, Submission, and Execution of the Budget, section 
20.7(d), (g) (June 29, 2018), available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/a11.pdf (June 29, 
2018). (providing guidance on the FY 2020 budget and instructions on 
budget execution, offsetting collections, and user fees).
    \13\ 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, 1952 (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 understands they reflect best practices and 
used the activity-based costing (ABC) methodology supported in 
Circulars A-25 and A-11 to develop the proposed fee schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, this rulemaking accounts for, and is consistent with, 
congressional appropriations for specific USCIS programs. FY 2021 
appropriations for USCIS provided funding for the E-Verify employment 
eligibility verification program. Congress provided E-Verify with 
$117.8 million for operations and support. See Consolidated 
Appropriations Act, 2021, Pub. L. 116-260, div. F, tit. IV (Dec. 27, 
2020). 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 2021 appropriations for USCIS are 
$127.8 million. For the last several years, USCIS has not had the 
authority to spend more than $10 million for citizenship grants. Until 
recently, grant program funding came from the IEFA fee revenue or a mix 
of appropriations and fee revenue.\14\ Because Congress appropriated 
funds for grants in FY 2021, the $10 million budgeted for citizenship 
grants is not part of the FY 2022/2023 IEFA fee review budget.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 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 grants program in FY 2015, FY 2016, FY 2017, and FY 
2018. Congress provided $10 million for citizenship and integration 
grants in FY 2019 (Pub. L. 116-6) and FY 2020 (Pub. L. 116-93).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Effect of FY 2022 Appropriations

    In FY 2022, Congress provided USCIS additional appropriations for 
very specific purposes. See Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022, 
Public Law 117-103 (Mar. 15, 2022) (``Pub. L. 117-103''). USCIS 
received approximately $389.5 million for E-Verify, application 
processing, backlog reduction, and the refugee program. See id at div. 
F, title IV. Of that amount, approximately $87.6

[[Page 416]]

million is available until the end of FY 2023. Id. These funds will be 
in a separate appropriated account. Id. USCIS will use $275 million to 
reduce USCIS application and petition backlogs and delays, support 
refugee admissions up to a ceiling of 125,000, and invest in enterprise 
infrastructure improvements such as case file management and video 
interviewing capabilities.\15\ USCIS will use the remaining amount, 
approximately $114.5 million, to fund E-Verify. In addition, Congress 
provided $20 million for Federal Assistance for the Immigrant 
Citizenship and Integration Grants program. Id. This is $10 million 
more than in a typical year.\16\ USCIS also received $193 million for 
Operation Allies Welcome (OAW). See Extending Government Funding and 
Delivering Emergency Assistance Act, 2022, Public Law 117-43 (Sept. 30, 
2021) (``Pub. L. 117-43'') at div. C. title V, sec. 2501. In FY 2022, 
approximately $119.7 million is available for use in the Immigration 
Examinations Fee Account, which is a no-year account. The remaining OAW 
amount will be available in FY 2023 or until expended. In all of these 
cases, the laws provide that the funds are only to be used for the 
specified purposes, and DHS is not required to reduce any current IEFA 
fee.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ This $275 million includes $250 million that USCIS received 
in an earlier continuing resolution. See Extending Government 
Funding and Delivering Emergency Assistance Act, 2022, Public Law 
117-43 (Sept. 30, 2021) at div. A, sec. 132. USCIS received an 
additional $25 million in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022, 
Public Law 117-103 (Mar. 15, 2022) at div. F, title IV.
    \16\ For example, Congress appropriated $10 million in FY 2021. 
See section III.A of this preamble for more information.
    \17\ Public Law 117-43, at section 132, states, ``That such 
amounts shall be in addition to any other funds made available for 
such purposes, and shall not be construed to require any reduction 
of any fee described in section 286(m) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1356(m)):'' Likewise, Public Law 117-43, 
at section 2501, states ``That such amounts shall be in addition to 
any other amounts made available for such purposes and shall not be 
construed to require any reduction of any fee described in section 
286(m) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1356(m)).'' 
USCIS has a long history of funding citizenship and integration 
grants from IEFA revenue, appropriations, or a mix of both.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FY 2022/2023 fee review budget that is the basis for this 
proposed rule excludes all appropriated funding, including the 
approximately $529.2 million provided so far in FY 2022. USCIS will use 
the appropriated funding for the purposes provided by Congress. The 
appropriations support several DHS priorities, for example, decreasing 
USCIS application processing times, reducing the backlog of requests 
already on hand and being adjudicated (and for which a fee may have 
already been paid). USCIS may also use the appropriations to expand 
refugee processing efforts, and support vulnerable Afghans, including 
those who worked alongside Americans in Afghanistan for the past two 
decades, as they safely resettle in the United States. These 
appropriations do not overlap with the fee review budget, which will 
fund immigration adjudication and naturalization services for future 
incoming receipts. The full costs of operating USCIS that are included 
in the fee model do not include separate line items budgeted directly 
for backlog reduction and OAW. Had the appropriation not been received, 
DHS and USCIS would have been required to use funds budgeted for other 
uses to fund the costs of OAW. While DHS and USCIS are very focused on 
reducing backlogs, our efforts to reduce the backlog did not include a 
significant shift of IEFA non-premium funds from normal operations to 
that effort. USCIS funded previous backlog reduction efforts with IEFA 
premium processing revenue and supplemental appropriations.\18\ The 
backlog represents uncompleted work which USCIS already received, but 
did not complete, and the appropriated funds will assist in clearing 
that workload. In the absence of appropriations, USCIS may continue to 
fund backlog reduction efforts with premium processing revenue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The last time USCIS received appropriations for the backlog 
was in FY 2008. See Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008, Public 
Law 110-161, Title IV (Dec. 26, 2007). USCIS received $20 million 
``to address backlogs of security checks associated with pending 
applications and petitions.'' More recently, Congress authorized 
USCIS to use premium processing revenue to address the backlog. See 
Emergency Stopgap USCIS Stabilization Act, Public Law 116-159, Div. 
D, Title IV (Oct. 1, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS received appropriations to fund some of the additional spending 
that USCIS will require for the refugee ceiling increase to 125,000 
beginning in FY 2022, as described in section V.A.2.b.\19\ This is a 
significant increase over recent years. The refugee admission ceiling 
was 62,500 for FY 2021 and 18,000 for FY 2020.\20\ DHS is including 
this amount in its total costs to be recovered by the fees proposed in 
this rule because the appropriations in Public Law 117-103 will be used 
to cover the FY 2022 expenses for the refugee program, while this rule 
is unlikely to be effective until FY 2023. The approximately $87.6 
million appropriated for application processing that is available until 
the end of FY 2023 may be insufficient to fund backlog reduction and 
refugee processing. For example, the President's budget request for FY 
2023 included $765 million for increasing asylum caseloads, backlog 
reduction, and refugee processing.\21\ While USCIS is committed to 
seeking Congressional appropriations for refugee processing costs in 
the future, USCIS cannot presume such appropriations, especially given 
the lack of appropriations in the past. If this fee rule does not 
account for the possibility of no Congressional funding in future years 
and Congress fails to fund the program, either the program cannot 
continue or USCIS will be forced to reallocate resources assigned to 
another part of the agency for this purpose. However, if USCIS is 
certain to receive additional appropriations to fund the FY 2023 
refugee program at the time of the final rule, then USCIS may reduce 
the estimated budget requirements funded by IEFA fees accordingly in 
the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See White House, ``Memorandum for the Secretary of State on 
Presidential Determination on Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 
2022'' (Oct. 8, 2021), https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/10/08/memorandum-for-the-secretary-of-state-on-presidential-determination-on-refugee-admissions-for-fiscal-year-2022/.
    \20\ See White House, ``Memorandum for the Secretary of State on 
the Emergency Presidential Determination on Refugee Admissions for 
Fiscal Year 2021'' (May 3, 2021), https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/05/03/memorandum-for-the-secretary-of-state-on-the-emergency-presidential-determination-on-refugee-admissions-for-fiscal-year-2021-2/; see also Trump White 
House, ``Presidential Determination on Refugee Admissions for Fiscal 
Year 2020'' (Nov. 1, 2019), https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-determination-refugee-admissions-fiscal-year-2020/.
    \21\ See White House, Budget of the United States, Fiscal Year 
2023, p. 20, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/budget_fy2023.pdf (last visited April 20, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FY 2022 appropriation laws also require additional services and 
impose reporting, processing, and monitoring requirements that will add 
costs for USCIS. See, e.g., Public Law 117-43 at secs. 2502-2503. The 
reporting requirements of Public Law 117-43 are quarterly and extend 
through September 30, 2023, although the amounts appropriated are only 
available for fiscal year 2022. Id at secs. 2503(a) and 2506. DHS will 
fund these reporting costs with the appropriated funds for FY 2022 and 
thus has excluded most of them from this rule. Id. at secs. 2502-2503. 
Congress also added reporting requirements when it reauthorized and 
revised the Employment-Based Immigrant Visa, Fifth Preference (EB-5) 
authority. See Public Law 117-103, div. BB and section III.F of this 
preamble for more information. IEFA fees will fund

[[Page 417]]

operational expenses as needed in FY 2022/2023, including the reporting 
requirements imposed by Public Law 117-43 and Public Law 117-103 that 
are not funded by appropriated funds. DHS describes the FY 2022/2023 
fee review budget in section V.A. of this preamble.

C. Immigration Examinations Fee Account

    USCIS manages three fee accounts:
     The IEFA (includes premium processing revenues),\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ INA sec. 286(m), (n), and (u); 8 U.S.C. 1356(m), (n), and 
(u).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The Fraud Prevention and Detection Account,\23\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ INA secs. 214(c)(12) and (13), 286(v); 8 U.S.C. 1184(c)(12) 
and (13), 1356(v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The H-1B Nonimmigrant Petitioner Account.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ INA secs. 214(c)(9) and (11), 286(s); 8 U.S.C. 1184(c)(9) 
and (11), 1356(s).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 sec. 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 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 accounted for approximately 96 percent of total 
funding for USCIS in FY 2021 and is the focus of this proposed rule. 
IEFA non-premium funding represents 83 percent and IEFA premium funding 
represents 13 percent of USCIS FY 2021 total funding. The remaining 
USCIS funding comes from appropriations (approximately 3 percent) or 
other fee accounts (approximately 1 percent) in FY 2021. The Fraud 
Prevention and Detection Account and H-1B Nonimmigrant Petitioner 
Account are both funded by fees for which the dollar amount is set by 
statute.\25\ DHS has no authority to adjust the fees for these 
accounts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See the supporting documentation included in the docket of 
this rulemaking. There is additional information on these accounts 
in Appendix II--USCIS Funding and Account Structure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Full Cost Recovery

    USCIS receives millions of requests each year for immigration 
benefits. These benefits are funded by DHS, generally, by charging fees 
for USCIS services. In recent years, however, and as fully explained in 
this rule preamble and its supporting documents, USCIS costs have 
surpassed the fees it collects.
    As stated earlier, DHS publishes this proposed rule under the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (``INA''), which establishes the 
``Immigration Examinations Fee Account'' (``IEFA'') for the receipt of 
fees it charges. INA section 286(m), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m). The INA allows 
DHS to 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.'' Id. 
The INA further provides that ``[s]uch fees may also be set at a level 
that will recover any additional costs associated with the 
administration of the fees collected.'' Id.
    DHS proposes this rule to address the projected deficits and 
unsustainable fiscal situation of USCIS that are explained in this 
proposal and in the supporting documentation in the docket. See section 
IX.A of this preamble; see also IEFA Non-Premium Carryover Projections 
in the supporting documentation included in the docket to this 
rulemaking. Carryover is unobligated or unexpended fee revenue 
accumulated from previous fiscal years. Because USCIS is primarily fee-
funded, it must ensure that it maintains a carryover balance to 
continue operating, and INA section 286(m), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m) authorizes 
DHS to set fees at a level to recover ``the full costs'' of providing 
``all'' ``adjudication and naturalization services,'' and ``the 
administration of the fees collected.'' (emphasis added.) This 
necessarily includes support costs such as physical overhead, 
information technology, management and oversight, human resources, 
national security vetting and investigations,\26\ accounting and 
budgeting, and legal, for example. USCIS' current budget forecasts a 
deficit based on fully funding all of its operations, and DHS must make 
up that difference either by cutting costs, curtailing operations, or 
increasing revenue. DHS has examined USCIS recent budget history, 
service levels, and immigration trends to forecast its costs, revenue, 
and operational metrics in order to determine whether USCIS fees would 
generate sufficient revenue to fund anticipated operating costs. As 
explained in this rule and the supporting documents, USCIS costs are 
projected to be considerably higher than projected fee revenue should 
fees remain at their current levels. The primary cost driver 
responsible for this increase is payroll, including the need to hire 
additional staff due to an increase in the volume of applications that 
USCIS receives and the increase in time per adjudication for USCIS to 
process many applications, petitions, and requests. See section V.B. 
for a discussion of USCIS workload and the time to adjudicate 
applications, petitions, and requests. See also section IX.C for 
planned increases in efficiency. USCIS has already curtailed its own 
costs and implemented cost-cutting measures, and any further reductions 
would adversely affect the services USCIS provides to applicants 
including adjudications time and processes. See section V.A.2. and 
section IX.B. of this preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Congress recommended that DHS establish an organization 
``responsible for developing, implementing, directing, and 
overseeing the joint USCIS-Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) 
anti-fraud initiative and conducting law enforcement/background 
checks on every applicant, beneficiary, and petitioner prior to 
granting immigration benefits.'' See, Conference Report to accompany 
H.R. 4567 [Report 108-774], ``Making Appropriations for the 
Department of Homeland Security for the Fiscal Year Ending September 
30, 2005,'' p. 74, available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-108hrpt774/pdf/CRPT-108hrpt774.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with these authorities, sources, and needs, 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.
    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, 
section 1, 58 FR 38144. 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., section 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

[[Page 418]]

     Costs of enforcement, collection, research, establishment 
of standards, and regulation.
    Id., section 6, 58 FR 38145. Second, this proposed rule would set 
fees at a level sufficient to fund overall requirements and general 
operations related to USCIS IEFA programs. The current and proposed 
IEFA fees fund programs that are not associated with specific statutory 
fees or funded by annual appropriations. The proposed fees would also 
recover the difference between the full cost of adjudicating benefit 
requests and the revenue generated when such requests are fee exempt, 
in whole or in part, when the fees for such requests are set at a level 
below full cost by statute or policy, and when fees are waived, 
consistent with past fee calculation methodology. As noted, Congress 
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 sec. 286(m), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m).\27\ DHS has long 
interpreted 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, section 6d(1); INA sec. 286(m), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m). See, 
e.g., 66 FR 65811 at 65813 (Dec. 21, 2001) (responding to commenters 
opposed to the use of IEFA fees to pay expenses for unrelated services 
by stating that those costs must be recovered from the fees charged to 
other applicants for immigration and naturalization benefits.). 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.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Congress has provided separate, but similar, authority for 
establishing USCIS genealogy program fees. See INA sec. 286(t), 8 
U.S.C. 1356(t). The statute requires that genealogy program fees be 
deposited into the IEFA 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.
    \28\ Congress has not defined either term with any degree of 
specificity for purposes of paragraphs (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 
self-explanatory, section 286(m) contains both silence and ambiguity 
concerning the precise scope that `full costs' entails in this 
context.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with the historical position and practice of DHS, this 
proposed rule would set fees at a level that ensures recovery of the 
full operating costs of USCIS, the component within DHS that provides 
almost all immigration adjudication and naturalization services. See 
Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107-296, sec. 451, 116 Stat. 
2142 (Nov. 26, 2002) (6 U.S.C. 271). Congress has historically relied 
on the IEFA 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' limited historical 
appropriations to USCIS. The agency typically receives only a small 
annual appropriation for specific uses. USCIS must use fee revenues, as 
a matter of both discretion and necessity, to fund all operations 
associated with activities that USCIS is charged by law to administer 
that are not funded by other means.
    Certain functions, including the Systematic Alien Verification for 
Entitlements (SAVE) program \29\ and the Office of Citizenship,\30\ 
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, but they may be, and are, funded by the IEFA. Similarly, 
when a filing fee for an immigration benefit request, such as Temporary 
Protected Status (TPS), is capped by statute 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 sec. 244(c)(1)(B), 8 U.S.C. 1254a(c)(1)(B) (capping TPS 
registration fee at $50); 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(NN); proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(48)(i). Also, when DHS exempts certain benefit requests from 
filing fees, such as applications or petitions from qualifying victims 
who assist law enforcement in the investigation or prosecution of human 
trafficking (T nonimmigrant status) or certain other crimes (U 
nonimmigrant status), USCIS recovers the cost of providing those fee-
exempt or no-fee services through fees charged to other applicants and 
petitioners. See, e.g., 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(UU) and (VV) (Oct. 1, 
2020); proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(59) and (60).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 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 sec. 286(m) and (n) to Federal, state, and 
local agencies that require immigration adjudication information in 
administering their benefits.
    \30\ 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 section 286(m) and (n) of the INA. As Congress recognized in 
creating the Office of Citizenship in section 451(f) of the Homeland 
Security Act (6 U.S.C. 271(f)), providing information to potential 
applicants for naturalization regarding the process of 
naturalization and related activities. is an integral part of 
providing ``such services''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OMB guidance gives agencies discretion to interpret when additional 
statutory requirements apply to user fees. See Circular A-25, section 
4, 58 FR 38144. In that regard, in INA sec. 286(m), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m), 
Congress imposed on DHS an additional obligation--to recover the full 
cost of USCIS operations--over and above the advice in OMB Circular A-
25 concerning the direct correlation or connection between costs and 
fees. Nevertheless, DHS follows OMB Circular A-25 to the extent 
possible while complying with Congress's directive, 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. See OMB Circular A-25, section 6d(1). 
DHS applies the discretion provided in INA sec. 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) allocate costs for programs for 
which a fee is not charged or a law limits the fee amount, (3) 
distribute costs that are not attributed to, or driven by, specific 
adjudication and naturalization services; and (4) make additional 
adjustments to effectuate specific policy objectives.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ DHS may reasonably adjust fees based on value judgments and 
public policy reasons consistent with its statutory authority and 
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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The ABC model distributes indirect costs. Indirect costs are not 
specifically identifiable with one output because they may contribute 
to several outputs. The ABC model uses a cause-and-effect relationship 
to distribute most indirect costs. See the supporting documentation 
included in this docket for information on direct and 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

[[Page 419]]

model in a spreadsheet. The fee schedule spreadsheet adjusts the model 
results to effectuate a desired result such as a lower fee to encourage 
or not discourage the filing of a specific benefit request. For 
example, the model determines the direct and indirect costs for refugee 
workload. The costs associated with processing workload without fees or 
where fees do not recover full cost must be reallocated outside the ABC 
model. USCIS reallocates these costs to fee-paying immigration benefit 
requests, either among the same request, among all fee-paying requests 
or among certain unrelated fee-paying requests. For example, the costs 
of Form I-485 filings that are fee-waived are shifted to the Form I-485 
filings that pay the fee. All immigration benefit request fees that 
recover their full cost also recover the cost of workloads without 
fees, such as refugee workload. In this proposal, USCIS is allocating 
more asylum costs to Forms I-129 and I-140 than the forms would receive 
without additional intervention. The supporting documentation in the 
docket contains an in-depth explanation of the ABC model and DHS has 
included documentation for the fee schedule spreadsheet in the docket 
for public review. USCIS acknowledges that its ABC model and fee 
schedule are complex, but both are necessary to allocate the costs of 
an agency with the size and breadth of purpose as USCIS. DHS invites 
the public to request a demonstration of how the fee calculations are 
affected by the direct and indirect cost allocation, shifting costs 
from free immigration benefits to others, and capping certain fees at 
decided-upon levels.
    Typically, Congressional appropriations and two other small fee 
accounts represent between 2-5 percent (combined) of USCIS' annual 
budget.\32\ Each has statutory limits for both amounts and uses. 
Appropriations are typically limited to use for E-Verify employment 
status verification and the Citizenship and Integration grant program. 
Congress authorizes or requires USCIS to carry out seemingly non-
adjudicatory functions and approves the DHS budget, knowing that USCIS 
must use IEFA funds to cover those expenses which Congress does not 
otherwise fund through appropriations and statutory fees. Therefore, by 
approving the use of the IEFA every year to fund seemingly non-
adjudicatory functions, Congress acknowledges our construction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ This does not include the appropriations received for FY 
2022 as discussed in detail earlier in this preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. The Use of Premium Processing Funds Under the Emergency Stopgap 
USCIS Stabilization Act

    On October 1, 2020, the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2021 and 
Other Extensions Act (Continuing Appropriations Act) was signed into 
law. Public Law 116-159 (Oct. 1, 2020). The Continuing Appropriations 
Act included the Emergency Stopgap USCIS Stabilization Act (USCIS 
Stabilization Act), which allows USCIS to establish and collect 
additional premium processing fees and to use premium processing funds 
for expanded purposes. See Public Law 116-159, secs. 4101 and 4102, 134 
Stat. 739 (Oct. 1, 2020); 8 U.S.C. 1356(u). That statute is expected to 
result in continued increases to USCIS premium processing revenue. 
USCIS can now use premium processing revenue, if necessary, to provide 
the infrastructure needed to carry out a broader range of activities 
than previously authorized. Importantly for the purposes of this 
proposed rule, the USCIS Stabilization Act permits USCIS to make 
infrastructure improvements in adjudication processes and the provision 
of information and services to immigration and naturalization benefit 
requestors. 8 U.S.C. 1356(u)(4). The USCIS Stabilization Act also 
establishes higher fees for existing premium processing services and 
permits USCIS to expand premium processing to certain additional 
benefits. 8 U.S.C. 1356(u)(2) and (3). It also exempts the agency from 
the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) 
when instituting section 4102(b)(1) of the USCIS Stabilization Act. In 
addition, it provides that the required processing timeframe for the 
newly designated benefits will not commence until all prerequisites for 
adjudication are received, which would include biometrics and 
background check results. See section 4102(b)(2) of the USCIS 
Stabilization Act.
    On March 30, 2022, DHS published a final rule, ``Implementation of 
the Emergency Stopgap USCIS Stabilization Act,'' implementing part of 
the authority provided under the USCIS Stabilization Act to offer 
premium processing for those benefit requests made eligible for premium 
processing by section 4102(b) of that law. See 87 FR 18227 (premium 
processing rule). The USCIS Stabilization Act requires that when DHS 
implements the expansion of immigration benefit types that are 
designated for premium processing, it must not result in an increase in 
processing times for immigration benefit requests not designated for 
premium processing or an increase in regular processing of immigration 
benefit requests so designated.\33\ For this reason, DHS did not make 
premium processing immediately available for all immigration benefit 
requests newly designated in the premium processing rule. Id. Rather, 
premium processing will be made available for a newly designated 
immigration benefit requests only when DHS determines that it will have 
the resources in place to adjudicate the requests within the time 
required, and that the availability of premium processing for that 
immigration benefit request will not adversely affect other immigration 
benefit requests not designated for premium processing or the regular 
processing of immigration benefit requests so designated.\34\ 
Nevertheless, while acknowledging its peripheral impacts as an 
overlapping or interrelated rulemaking, DHS has determined that, at 
this time, premium processing revenue is not sufficient to appreciably 
affect non-premium fees. Thus, this proposed rule does not include 
changes directly resulting from the USCIS Stabilization Act or premium 
processing rule, except to conform 8 CFR 106.4 to the USCIS 
Stabilization Act's requirements. DHS recognizes, however, that it will 
have more information about the revenue collected from premium 
processing services by the time DHS publishes a final rule. If 
appropriate, DHS will consider including premium processing revenue and 
costs in the final rule. USCIS' forecasted demand for premium 
processing, revenue projections, and spending plans for the premium 
processing rule are discussed in greater detail in the premium 
processing rule. See 87 FR 18227 (Mar. 30, 2022). While DHS estimates 
that the premium processing rule will increase USCIS annual revenues 
over the next ten years, as stated previously, because of the resources 
required for expanding the availability of premium processing to newly 
designated immigration benefit requests, full implementation of 
expanded premium processing is estimated to be complete around FY 2025. 
This timeline for full implementation will allow current premium 
processing revenue to fund other authorized uses and strategic 
improvements until adequate revenues exist to cover the costs of 
providing expedited processing of the new

[[Page 420]]

requests. USCIS plans to use premium processing revenue to provide 
premium processing service, improve our information technology 
infrastructure, and reduce backlogs. Accordingly, although the revenue 
from premium processing is not considered in this proposed rule as 
previously indicated, the costs for USCIS to provide premium processing 
service, improve our information technology infrastructure, and reduce 
the backlog are also not considered in the proposed fees. Examples of 
premium processing costs include:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See Public Law 116-159, sec. 4102(c) (Oct. 1, 2020).
    \34\ See Public Law 116-159, sec. 4102(c) (Oct. 1, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Realignment of $25.1 million for IRIS Directorate 
information technology (IT) functions and support contracts in FY 2021.
     Office of Information Technology GE costs of $363.6 
million and $497 million for FY 2021 and FY 2022 respectively.
     $57.5 million in FY 2021 and $58.1 million in FY 2022 for 
Service Center Operations general expenses.
    Therefore, the projected revenue to be collected from future 
premium processing services established by the premium processing rule 
is too attenuated to be considered in the current biennial fee study 
and the ABC full cost recovery model used for this rule without placing 
USCIS at risk of revenue shortfalls if that revenue did not 
materialize. DHS has historically excluded premium processing revenue 
and costs from its IEFA fee reviews and rulemakings to ensure that 
premium processing funds are available for infrastructure investments 
largely related to information technology, are available to provide 
staff for backlog reduction, and to ensure that non-premium fees were 
set at a level sufficient to cover the base operating costs of USCIS. 
As noted above, if the revenue collected from premium processing 
services becomes more significant and certain before DHS publishes a 
final rule, DHS will consider including premium processing revenue and 
costs in the final rule. In the next USCIS biennial fee study, DHS will 
take into consideration the future effects of the premium processing 
rule and the USCIS Stabilization Act allowing for premium processing 
revenue to be used for more general uses than what was previously 
authorized.

F. EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022

    On March 15, 2022, the President signed the EB-5 Reform and 
Integrity Act of 2022, Div. BB of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 
2022, Public Law 117-103. The EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022 
immediately repealed the Regional Center Pilot Program created by the 
Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related 
Agencies Appropriations Act 1993, Public Law 102-395, 106 Stat. 1828, 
sec. 610(b). The law also authorizes a new EB-5 Regional Center 
Program, effective May 14, 2022, and is authorized through FY 2026 and 
makes various changes to the program. As discussed more fully in 
section VIII.O. of this preamble, DHS proposes new fees for the forms 
used in the EB-5 program in this rule.
    The EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022 requires DHS to conduct a 
fee study not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this 
Act and, not later than 60 days after the completion of the study, set 
fees for EB-5 program related immigration benefit requests at a level 
sufficient to recover the costs of providing such services, and 
completing the adjudications within certain time frames. See Public Law 
117-103, sec. 106(b). Further, the law provides that the fee 
adjustments that it requires are notwithstanding the requirements of 
INA section 286(m), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m), the authority under which we are 
publishing this rule. Id. The law also provides that the fee study 
required by 106(a) does not preclude DHS from adjusting its fees in the 
interim. Id. sec. 106(f). Therefore, DHS proposes new fees for the EB-5 
program forms in this rule using the full cost recovery model described 
herein that we have used to calculate those fees since the program's 
inception and not the fee study parameters and processing time frames 
required by the EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022. USCIS will 
collect fees established under INA section 286(m), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m), 
for the EB-5 program, including as may be effected by a final rule for 
this proposed rule, until the fees established under section 106(a) of 
the EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022 take effect.

G. Fee Review History

1. Current State of USCIS Fee Schedule Regulations
    On August 3, 2020, DHS published the 2020 fee rule, with an 
effective date of October 2, 2020, to adjust the USCIS fee schedule and 
make changes to certain other immigration benefit request requirements. 
On September 29, 2020, the United States District Court for the 
Northern District of California granted a motion for a preliminary 
injunction of the 2020 fee rule in its entirety and stayed the final 
rule's effective date in ILRC. On October 8, 2020, the United States 
District Court for the District of Columbia also granted a motion for a 
preliminary injunction and stay of the effective date of the final rule 
in NWIRP. DHS subsequently issued a notification of preliminary 
injunction on January 29, 2021, to inform the public of the two 
preliminary injunctions. See 86 FR 7493. The Department continues to 
comply with the terms of those orders and is not enforcing the 
regulatory changes set out in the 2020 fee rule. In addition to the 
changes made in the 2020 fee rule, in 2019 DHS revised USCIS fee waiver 
policies and USCIS Form 1-912, including by requiring fee waiver 
applicants to use the revised Form I-912, requiring waiver applicants 
to submit tax transcripts to demonstrate income, and not accepting 
evidence of receipt of a means-tested public benefit as evidence of 
inability to pay as described (``the 2019 Fee Waiver Revisions''). See 
USCIS Policy Manual Volume 1: General Policies and Procedures, Part B, 
Submission of Benefit Requests, Chapter 3, Fees and Chapter 4, Fee 
Waivers which were issued on October 25, 2019 and took effect on 
December 2, 2019 City of Seattle v. Dep't of Homeland Sec., No. 3:19-
CV-07151-MMC (N.D. Cal. Dec.; see also 84 FR 26137 (June 5, 2019) (30-
day notice announcing changes to USCIS fee waiver polices and USCIS 
Form I-912, submission to OMB, and requesting public comment). On 
December 11, 2019, the United States District Court for the Northern 
District of California preliminarily enjoined the 2019 Fee Waiver 
Revisions in11, 2019) (``City of Seattle''). USCIS continues to accept 
the fees that were in place before October 2, 2020, and follow the 
guidance in place before October 25, 2019, to adjudicate fee waiver 
requests.
    DHS and the parties in ILRC, NWIRP, City of Seattle, and the 
related cases agreed to, and the courts have approved, a stay of those 
cases while the agency undertook this fee review and prepared this 
notice of proposed rulemaking.
    While DHS is enjoined from implementing or enforcing the 2020 fee 
rule, the revisions set out in that rule were codified. While 8 CFR 
part 106 and the other revisions set out in the 2020 fee rule are found 
in the CFR, DHS did not implement them and continues to charge the fees 
and follow the fee waiver policies that were, for the most part, in 8 
CFR 103.7 as it existed before October 2, 2020. By this rulemaking, DHS 
will replace the enjoined regulations and correct the currently 
incorrect USCIS fee regulations in the CFR.
    Because the 2020 fee rule was codified, this rule proposes to amend 
the text of certain changes made by the

[[Page 421]]

2020 fee rule and codified in the CFR. However, because DHS did not 
implement the 2020 fee rule, this preamble discusses substantive 
changes that refer to the requirements of the regulations that existed 
before October 2, 2020. Likewise, the regulatory impact analysis (RIA) 
for this proposed rule analyzes the impacts of the changes between the 
pre-2020 fee rule regulations that DHS is following under the 
injunctions and those proposed in this rule.
    This rule proposes relatively minor wording changes to the changes 
codified by the 2020 fee rule, and, in most cases, DHS is only 
proposing a new fee amount. However, because DHS could not implement 
the regulations codified on October 2, 2020, DHS does not believe that 
describing only the amendments to those sections is adequate to provide 
the affected public with what it needs to adequately review, 
understand, and comment on what is being proposed in this rule. 
Therefore, DHS has published entire portions of the regulatory text 
being proposed in this rule to provide a clear picture of what DHS is 
proposing, including sections that are codified in the CFR but were not 
implemented by USCIS.
    Many of the proposed provisions in this rule are verbatim or close 
to verbatim to what is already codified, although enjoined. However, 
because those provisions are enjoined, DHS will address them as if they 
are newly proposed and cite to, for example, ``proposed 8 CFR 106.2.'' 
When this preamble discusses the no longer codified but still in effect 
provisions of title 8 of the CFR, the standard of citing to the CFR 
print edition date \35\ may be inaccurate because title 8 was amended 
by a number of rules during calendar year 2020. Therefore, when citing 
fee regulations as they existed on October 1, 2020, the regulatory 
citation will be followed by that date. For example, the citation for 
the Biometric Services fee that was removed by the 2020 fee rule but is 
still in effect would be written, ``See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(C) (Oct. 
1, 2020).'' \36\ When citing to a provision that was codified by the 
2020 fee rule that is not proposed in this rule, the regulatory 
citation will be followed by the effective date of the 2020 fee rule. 
For example, the citation for the separate fees for different versions 
of Form I-129 is cited as ``8 CFR 106.2(a)(3) (Oct. 2, 2020).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ The soft bound print edition of the CFR is revised on a 
quarterly basis. Titles 1 through 16 are revised as of January 1 
each year.
    \36\ Readers may find the OFR's eCFR a useful tool to review 
historic regulatory text. For more information on viewing historical 
versions of the eCFR, see https://www.ecfr.gov/reader-aids/using-ecfr/ecfr-changes-through-time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated previously, this rule would replace the changes about 
which the plaintiffs in ILRC, NWIRP, and City of Seattle brought suit. 
For clarity and to avoid unnecessary length in this rule, DHS is not 
repeating the amendatory instructions and regulatory text for certain 
changes that were made by the 2020 fee rule if the provision is 
ministerial, procedural, or otherwise non-substantive, such as a 
regulation cross reference, form number or form name. Specifically, DHS 
proposes to make no changes to the following provisions that were 
codified in the 2020 fee rule:

    1. Replace ``Sec.  103.7(b)(1) of this chapter'' with ``8 CFR 
103.7(d)(4)'' in 8 CFR 217.2.
    2. Replace ``Sec.  103.7(b)(1) of this chapter'' with ``8 CFR 
103.7(d)(4)'' in 8 CFR 217.2.
    3. Remove ``8 CFR 103.7,'' ``8 CFR 103.7(b)'' and ``8 CFR 
103.7(b)(1)'' and ``Sec.  103.7 of this chapter'' and replace it 
with ``8 CFR 106.2'' in 8 CFR 204.6, 204.310, 204.311, 204.313, 
211.1, 211.2, 212.2, 212.3, 212.4, 212.7, 212.15, 212.18, 214.1, 
214.3, 214.6, 214.11, 214.16. 216.4, 216.5, 216.6, 223.2, 236.14, 
236.15, 245.7, 245.10, 245.15, 245.18, 245.21, 245.23, 245a.12, 
245a.13, 245a.20, 245a.33, 248.3, 264.2, 264.5, 264.6, 286.9, 301.1, 
319.11, 320.5, 322.3, 322.5, 324.2. 334.2, 341.1, 341.5, 343a.1, 
343b.1, 392.4.
    4. Replace all references to ``Form I-129'' and any supplements, 
and adding in its place either ``the form prescribed by USCIS,'' 
``application or petition,'' as appropriate in 8 CFR 214.1 and 
214.2.
    5. Replace ``Sec.  103.7(b)(1) of this chapter'' with ``8 CFR 
103.7(d)(4)'' in 8 CFR 217.2.
    6. In 8 CFR part 235, replace ``Sec.  103.7(b)(1) of this 
chapter'' and Sec.  ``103.7(b)(1)'' with ``8 CFR 103.7(d)(3)'' in 8 
CFR 235.1, with ``8 CFR 103.7(d)(7)'' in 8 CFR 235.7, ``8 CFR 
103.7(d)(13)'' in 8 CFR 235.12, and ``8 CFR 103.7(d)(14)'' in 8 CFR 
235.13.
    7. Remove the second sentence of Sec.  245.21(b) and remove and 
reserve Sec. Sec.  245.15(c)(2)(iv)(B) and (h)(2), 
245.23(e)(1)(iii), and 245.24(d)(3) and (i)(1)(iv).
    8. Replace ``Missouri Service Center'' with ``National Benefit 
Center'' in 8 CFR 245a.18, 245a.19, and 245a.33.

2. Previous Fee Rules
    The USCIS IEFA fee schedule that is in effect was published in the 
DHS FY 2016/2017 fee rule. See 81 FR 73292 (Oct. 24, 2016).\37\ That 
rule and associated fees became effective on December 23, 2016. With 
that rule, DHS adjusted the USCIS immigration benefits fee schedule for 
the first time in more than six years, increasing fees by a weighted 
average of 21 percent. The fee schedule adjustment recovered all 
projected costs for FY 2016/2017, including the costs of the Refugee, 
Asylum, and International Operations Directorate (RAIO), SAVE, and the 
Office of Citizenship. See 81 FR 26911 and 73293.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ The phrase ``FY 2016/2017 fee rule,'' as used in this 
proposed rule, encompasses the fee review, proposed rule, final 
rule, and all supporting documentation associated with the 
regulations effective as of December 23, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The fee schedule had been adjusted previously as well, as follows:
     Before the creation of DHS, the Department of Justice 
(DOJ) Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) \38\ adjusted fees 
incrementally in 1994. See 59 FR 30520 (June 14, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ 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, sec. 
451 (6 U.S.C. 271).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     DOJ conducted a comprehensive fee review using 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 implemented fees for Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central 
American Relief Act (NACARA) between 1998 and 1999. See 63 FR 64895 
(Nov. 24, 1998) (proposed rule); 64 FR 27856 (May 21, 1999) (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 implemented premium processing in 2001. See 66 FR 
29682 (June 1, 2001). DOJ adjusted fees for inflation in 2002. See 66 
FR 65811 (Dec. 21, 2001).
     Following the creation of DHS in 2002, the agency adjusted 
fees in 2004 and 2005. See 69 FR 20528 (Apr. 15, 2004); 70 FR 50954 
(Aug. 29, 2005) (increasing the fee for Form I-290B from $110 to $385); 
70 FR 56182 (Sept. 26, 2005).
     After those incremental changes, DHS published a 
comprehensive FY 2008/2009 fee rule in 2007. See 72 FR 29851 (May 30, 
2007).
     DHS further amended USCIS fees in the FY 2010/2011 fee 
rule. See 75 FR 58962 (Sept. 24, 2010). This rule removed the costs of 
RAIO, 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 these programs in the time 
between the FY 2010/2011 fee rule and the FY 2016/2017 fee rule. See 81 
FR 26910-26912.
    The supporting documentation accompanying this proposed rule in the

[[Page 422]]

rulemaking docket at https://www.regulations.gov contains a historical 
fee schedule that shows the immigration benefit fee history since 
October 2005.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ For IEFA fee history before 2005, see USCIS, ``FY 2016/2017 
Immigration Examinations Fee Account Fee Review Supporting 
Documentation with Addendum'' (Oct 25, 2016), https://www.regulations.gov/document/USCIS-2016-0001-0466. Appendix VIII--
IEFA Fee History, page 56, provides fees from FY 1985 to Nov. 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Current Fees
    Table 2 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 2022/2023 fee review. The 
table excludes statutory fees that DHS cannot adjust or can only adjust 
for inflation.
BILLING CODE 9111-97-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.009

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.010


[[Page 423]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.011


[[Page 424]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.012

BILLING CODE 9111-97-C

IV. Fee-Setting Approach--Reversal of 2020 Fee Rule
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ 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 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 website. See 8 CFR 1.2 and 299.1. The word ``form'' is used 
in this proposed rule in both the specific and general sense.
    \41\ As described in this notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), 
the United States' obligations under the 1967 Protocol relating to 
the Status of Refugees (incorporating 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)(1) 
and (2) (Oct. 1, 2020); proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(7)(i) and (ii).
    \42\ Form I-191 was previously titled Application for Advance 
Permission to Return to Unrelinquished Domicile. See 8 CFR 
103.7(b)(1)(i)(O) (Oct. 1, 2020).
    \43\ The Form I-192 fee remained $585 when filed with and 
processed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). See 8 CFR 
103.7(b)(1)(i)(P) (Oct. 1, 2020).
    \44\ 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) (Oct. 1, 2020).
    \45\ 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) 
(Oct. 1, 2020). DOJ's Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) 
has a separate $165 fee, which applies when one or more applicants 
file with the immigration court.
    \46\ USCIS excluded Form I-905, Application to Issue 
Certification for Health Care Workers, from the FY 2022/2023 fee 
review. As such, it will not appear in any tables in this NPRM that 
display results of the FY 2022/2023 fee review. USCIS does not have 
a FY 2022/2023 forecast for Form I-905 because it has a five-year 
renewal cycle and only four applicants file it. USCIS adjudicates it 
manually, meaning it does not track the filings in any case 
management system. Future fee reviews may evaluate this fee if more 
information is available.
    \47\ USCIS excluded Form I-941, Application for Entrepreneur 
Parole, from the FY 2022/2023 fee review. As such, it will not 
appear in tables for workload, in tables for fee-paying volume, or 
elsewhere in this NPRM. DHS published a separate NPRM that proposed 
to terminate the program. See 83 FR 24415 (May 29, 2018). However, 
DHS withdrew that NPRM. See 86 FR 25809 (May 11, 2021). As of Sep. 
30, 2021, there are 24 FY 2021 receipts and only 54 receipts since 
the beginning of the program. DHS does not believe it has sufficient 
information to review this fee at this time. DHS does not propose 
any changes to this fee but may evaluate the fee in future fee 
reviews when more information is available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the 2020 fee rule NPRM, DHS explained that it was shifting its 
fees away from an ability-to-pay model to a beneficiary-pays model. See 
84 FR 62298 (Nov. 14, 2019); see also 85 FR 46795 (Aug. 3, 2020) (final 
rule stating that DHS had proposed shifting to a beneficiary-pays 
model). As described by the U.S. Government Accountability Office 
(GAO), under the beneficiary-pays principle, the beneficiaries of a 
service pay for the cost of providing that service.\48\ Under the 
ability-to-pay principle, those who are more capable of bearing the 
burden of fees pay more for the service than those with less ability to 
pay. Id. Before the 2020 fee rule, DHS engaged in a balance of these 
two fee-setting principles when setting USCIS fees. Generally, DHS has 
given more weight to the ability-to-pay than the beneficiary-pays 
principle when setting USCIS fees, and has made affordability a central 
consideration.\49\ At the same time, DHS has not wholly rejected the 
beneficiary-pays principle, including when the agency made clear that 
it would not authorize fee waivers

[[Page 425]]

where such a waiver is inconsistent with the benefit requested, which 
may require establishing financial stability. See 75 FR 58974 (Sept. 
24, 2010). In addition, in past fee rules, DHS has declined to expand 
USCIS fee waivers to benefits for which the eligibility requires 
financial stability because that would contradict the rationale for 
shifting costs related to those applications to others through fee 
waivers. See 72 FR 29863 (May 30, 2007). DHS has also previously 
declined suggestions that it reduce the burden on low-income requestors 
by setting USCIS fees based on income using a tiered fee system, 
because the benefits from such a scenario would not justify the 
administrative costs added by requiring officers to adjudicate the 
documentation of the applicant's income and eligibility for the 
requested fee level before processing the request. Id. In the 2020 fee 
rule, DHS was concerned that the level of USCIS annual forgone revenue 
from fee waivers and exemptions had increased markedly from $191 
million in the FY 2010/2011 fee review to $613 million in the FY 2016/
2017 fee review. See 85 FR 46807 (Aug. 3, 2020) (citing 81 FR 26922 and 
73307). DHS estimated in the 2020 fee rule supporting documentation 
that, without changes to fee waiver policy, it would forgo revenue of 
almost $1.5 billion and believed that the fees necessary to recoup that 
foregone revenue \50\ were too high to support the continuation of the 
existing fee waiver policy.\51\ DHS notes, however, that in the 2020 
fee rule, the agency did not abandon the ability-to-pay principle 
altogether, and still provided for fee exemptions and statutorily 
mandated fee waivers in certain circumstances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ See GAO, ``Federal User Fees: A Design Guide'' (May 29, 
2008), https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-386SP, at 7-12.
    \49\ See 81 FR 26934 (May 4, 2016) (stating, ``The lower fee 
would help ensure that those who have worked hard to become eligible 
for naturalization are not limited by their economic means.'').
    \50\ In this context, ``foregone revenue'' refers to the dollar 
value associated with an approved fee waiver or fee-exempt forms and 
benefits.
    \51\ See, e.g., 85 FR 46799 (Aug. 3, 2020) (stating that the fee 
for Form N-400 would represent the estimated full cost to USCIS and 
be determined in the same manner as most other USCIS fees).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this new fee rule, DHS proposes to return the focus of its fee-
setting away from emphasizing the beneficiary-pays principle towards 
the historical balance between the beneficiary-pays and ability-to-pay 
principles. DHS proposes this for several reasons.
    First, DHS has been directed by the President to reduce barriers 
and promote accessibility to the immigration benefits that it 
administers. See Executive Order 14012, 86 FR 8277 (Feb. 2, 2021) (E.O. 
14012). As the President noted in section 1 of the Executive order, new 
Americans and their children fuel our economy; contribute to our arts, 
culture, and government; and have helped the United States lead the 
world in science, technology, and innovation. DHS agrees with the 
President's goals of E.O. 14012, and that our laws and policies must 
encourage full participation by immigrants, including refugees, in our 
civic life, and that immigration benefits must be delivered effectively 
and efficiently. More specifically, sections 3(a)(i) and 5(a)(iii) of 
E.O. 14012, respectively, instruct the Secretary of Homeland Security 
to identify barriers that impede access to immigration benefits and 
make the naturalization process more accessible to all eligible 
individuals, including through a potential reduction of the 
naturalization fee and restoration of the fee waiver process. Id. USCIS 
has already taken crucial steps towards ensuring fair access and 
removing unnecessary barriers and bureaucracy. See, e.g., Preserving 
Continuous Residence and Physical Presence for Purposes of 
Naturalization while Engaged in Religious Duties Outside the United 
States (May 25, 2021); \52\ Naturalization Eligibility and Voter 
Registration Through a State's Benefit Application Process (May 27, 
2021); \53\ Veterans Residing Outside the United States and 
Naturalization (May 28, 2021); \54\ Assisted Reproductive Technology 
and In-Wedlock Determinations for Immigration and Citizenship Purposes 
(August 5, 2021); \55\ Clarifying Guidance on Military Service Members 
and Naturalization (November 12, 2021); \56\ Demonstrating Eligibility 
for Modification under Section 337 (November 19, 2021).\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ U.S. Citizenship and Immigr. Servs., U.S. Dep't of Homeland 
Security, Preserving Residence, https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/policy-manual-updates/20210525-PreservingResidence.pdf (last updated May 25, 2021).
    \53\ U.S. Citizenship and Immigr. Servs., U.S. Dep't of Homeland 
Security, Naturalization Eligibility and Voter Registration Through 
a State's Benefit Application Process, https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/policy-manual-updates/20210527-VoterRegistration.pdf (last updated May 27, 2021).
    \54\ U.S. Citizenship and Immigr. Servs., U.S. Dep't of Homeland 
Security, Veterans Residing Outside the United States and 
Naturalization, https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/policy-manual-updates/20210528-MilitaryVeterans.pdf (last updated 
May 28, 2021).
    \55\ U.S. Citizenship and Immigr. Servs., U.S. Dep't of Homeland 
Security, Assisted Reproductive Technology and In-Wedlock 
Determinations for Immigration and Citizenship Purposes, https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/policy-manual-updates/20210805-AssistedReproductiveTechnology.pdf (last updated Aug 5, 
2021).
    \56\ U.S. Citizenship and Immigr. Servs., U.S. Dep't of Homeland 
Security, Clarifying Guidance on Military Service Members and 
Naturalization, https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/policy-manual-updates/20211112-MilitaryNaturalization.pdf (last 
updated Nov 12, 2021).
    \57\ This guidance allows children born to married legal 
parents, one of whom has a genetic or gestational link to the child, 
to acquire citizenship because these children are now considered 
born in wedlock. Immigration and Nationality Act. U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigr. Servs., U.S. Dep't of Homeland Security, Demonstrating 
Eligibility for Modification under Section 337 of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/policy-manual-updates/20211119-ModificationUnderINA337.pdf 
(last updated Nov 19, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of implementing Executive Order 14012, USCIS published a 
Request for Public Input \58\ (RPI) on reducing barriers and burdens 
across USCIS benefits and services as part of implementing Executive 
Order 14012. It received nearly 7,400 public comments as a result. 
USCIS analyzed these comments and incorporates actionable suggestions 
into this proposed rule including expanding fee exemptions, clarifying 
the financial hardship criteria for fee waivers, and maintaining the 
reduced fee for naturalization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ See 86 FR 20398 (Apr. 19, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, DHS has read and considered the many comments that we 
received on the 2020 fee rule that stated that the increased fees and 
restrictions on fee waivers in that rule would result in many fewer 
residents accessing a desired immigration status for which they are 
eligible, simply because they cannot afford to apply. Others wrote that 
the proposed naturalization fee increase would make naturalization 
unaffordable. Thus, many public comments on the 2020 fee rule indicated 
a preference for DHS placing greater emphasis on the ability-to-pay 
principle in setting its fees. As a result of these comments, and to 
encourage full economic and civic participation by immigrants, DHS has 
also analyzed the effects of this rule in light of its impacts on low-
income populations and organizations that assist them in section IX.A, 
Impact of Fees.
    As stated earlier, DHS is operating under two injunctions that 
preclude it from implementing or following the changes made by the 2020 
fee rule, as well as an injunction that precludes it from implementing 
the 2019 Fee Waiver Revisions. Thus, DHS must consider the concerns 
expressed and the courts' findings in those cases. For example, in 
ILRC, the order granting the injunction found that DHS failed to 
analyze the effect of that rule's fees on the demand for immigration 
benefit requests. The order also found that the rule's deviations from 
the beneficiary-pays principle conflict with the comments presented on 
the effects of these changes on low-income and vulnerable

[[Page 426]]

immigrant populations. See ILRC at 27. Similarly, the court in NWIRP 
agreed with the plaintiffs that the fees and fee waiver regulations in 
the 2020 fee rule could cause harm to low-income immigrants. See NWIRP 
at 72.
    DHS proposes to set USCIS fees at the level required to recover the 
full cost of providing immigration adjudication and naturalization 
services, as permitted or required by law, while providing certain fee 
exemptions and waivers for low-income immigrants. As USCIS estimates 
that the current fee structure will not generate sufficient revenue to 
cover the projected costs of providing immigration adjudication and 
naturalization services under the ABC methodology, the fees for many 
immigration benefit requests will by necessity increase. Nevertheless, 
where DHS has determined that this rule's approach would inequitably 
impact the ability of those who may be less able to afford the proposed 
fees to seek an immigration benefit for which they may be eligible, DHS 
proposes either to maintain the pre-2020 fee rule regulations, fee 
waivers, and reduced fees that USCIS is following, or to add new fee 
exemptions to address accessibility and affordability. For example, as 
detailed more fully later in this preamble, DHS proposes to maintain 
the fee waiver regulations and eligibility guidance that took effect in 
2010. Consistent with previous fee rules, DHS also proposes to limit 
the fees for certain benefit requests in recognition that fees set at 
the ABC model output for these forms would be overly burdensome. For 
example, as detailed later in this preamble, both considering the 
affordability of naturalization, and to promote naturalization for the 
benefits it provides to the country, DHS proposes to set the fee for 
Form N-400 at a level below what is required to recover the estimated 
full cost of providing naturalization services. In addition, DHS 
proposes to expand fee exemptions for certain vulnerable populations, 
as described later in this preamble.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ See section VII, Fee Exemptions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS acknowledges that the ability-to-pay principle necessarily 
requires the shifting of costs. If some customers are exempt from 
paying fees or have their fees waived, total fee collections cannot 
cover the total program costs unless other users pay higher fees to 
cover the costs associated with processing the benefit requests of non-
paying users. USCIS follows the principles in OMB Circular A-25 and 
uses an ABC model to align its fees closely with the estimated cost for 
the relevant service. When DHS deviates from the ABC model to limit, 
waive, or exempt certain customers from fees because they are overly 
burdensome, or to advance a public policy priority, this results in the 
fees for particular services being set at a level that is higher than 
the estimated cost of providing those services to fee-paying users. 
That means that DHS examined each fee in this proposed rule, and the 
fees proposed represent the Department's best effort to balance of 
access, affordability, equity, and benefits to the national interest 
while providing USCIS with the funding necessary to maintain adequate 
services.

V. FY 2022/2023 Immigration Examinations Fee Account Review

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 and naturalization trends to forecast costs, revenue, and 
operational metrics. These data help USCIS identify the difference 
between anticipated costs and revenue as well as calculate proposed 
fees. DHS provides a brief summary of how the USCIS budget has evolved 
from the projections included in the FY 2016/2017 fee rule for context 
before discussing the elements of the FY 2022/2023 fee review. The FY 
2022/2023 fee review encompasses three core elements:
     Cost projections;
     Revenue projections; and
     Cost and revenue differential (the difference between cost 
and revenue projections).
1. USCIS Budget History
    USCIS' costs have grown beyond the levels projected in the FY 2016/
2017 fee rule, which went into effect on December 23, 2016. This cost 
growth reflects increased USCIS workloads and staffing requirements 
during that time. The FY 2016/2017 fee rule estimated that an average 
annual IEFA non-premium cost projection of $3,037.8 million was 
required to meet USCIS' operational requirements.
    Spending grew by $1 billion or 28 percent between FY 2016 and FY 
2019, while revenue only grew by $406 million or 12 percent during the 
same period. Spending was driven by $943 million of one-time and 
recurring enhancements provided over the same time period due to a 
leadership directive to reduce carryover to around $800 million. The 
majority of this increased spending was attributed to an additional 
3,800 positions that were added between FY 2017 and FY 2019.\60\ No 
enhancements were added in FY 2020 due to budget reductions. Increased 
spending in enhancements in FY 2019 were approved based on the 
assumption that the FY 2019/2020 fee rule would be implemented in the 
summer of FY 2019, however subsequent to those decisions the FY 2019/
2020 fee rule was delayed until the end of FY 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ See the supporting documentation in the docket for this 
rule for more information. Appendix Table 9 on page 49 shows on-
board staffing by office and fiscal year. Please note that on-board 
staffing is a subset of authorized staffing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Despite the spending increases between FY 2016 and FY 2019, USCIS 
did not always spend as much as the plan called for, and carryover 
remained in a relatively strong position (about $1.2 billion) at the 
end of both FY 2017 and FY 2018. By the end of FY 2019, however, 
carryover had decreased to about $850 million. In first half of FY 
2020, before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the agency had 
substantially increased its first and second quarter spending, due to 
the timing of contracts and on-board levels; this drew carryover down 
to about $600 million at the end of February, with less than $200 
million in non-premium carryover, which funded 80 percent of USCIS 
operations. Although USCIS had surplus premium funding of about $400 
million, those funds were fenced due to statutory restrictions and 
could not be used to offset the deficit.
    In the Spring of 2020, in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, USCIS 
revenue dropped by 40 percent in April and an additional 25 percent in 
May from the forecasted collections. That created a possibility that 
USCIS might violate statutory anti-deficiency requirements and led to 
dramatic cuts in spending through the last half of FY 2020, a hiring 
freeze, and planned furloughs if revenue did not increase.
    Towards the end of June and July of 2020, revenue began to return 
to normal levels, and in conjunction with major budget cuts, allowed 
USCIS to avoid the furloughs. In FY 2021, USCIS instituted 32 percent 
cuts to non-payroll expenses, continued the hiring freeze through April 
2021, and did not fund enhancements. While USCIS carryover has 
stabilized and is projected to be over $600 million from non-premium 
fees at the end of FY 2022, USCIS is still living with effects of those 
32 percent budget cuts. USCIS has a minimum carryover

[[Page 427]]

threshold of $1,063.8 million in the non-premium IEFA.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ See the IEFA Non-Premium Carryover Projections section of 
the supporting documentation for how and why USCIS requires a 
minimum carryover balance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FY 2021 non-premium IEFA cost projections, which USCIS uses as 
the base for its FY 2022/2023 fee review cost projections, totals 
$3,776.3 million.\62\ As discussed later in greater detail, the FY 
2022/2023 fee review projects costs of $5,150.7 million for USCIS to 
fulfill its IEFA non-premium operational needs on an average annual 
basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ The USCIS FY 2021 Annual Operating Plan amount of $3,776 
million was reported in the FY 2022 Congressional Budget 
Justification and USCIS used this amount for cost projections to 
develop the proposed new fee structure. In March 2021, the USCIS FY 
2023 Congressional Budget Justification reported a different total 
FY 2021 Annual Operating Plan of $3,524 million. This fee review 
uses the earlier FY 2021 operating plan amount, which was a 
reasonable assumption at the time.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.013

    The combined average non-payroll or general expenses (GE) \63\ 
budget for the FY 2016/2017 fee review of $1,406.5 million increased by 
only 4.3 percent to $1,467.0 million in the FY 2021 Operating Plan 
(OP), which is a detailed spend plan for the agency that is finalized 
in the summer before the start of the fiscal year. Typically, the 
operating plan is executed closely to the original plan and is 
indicative of the resources needed for each of the Directorates and 
Program Offices to execute throughout the year. Excluding increased 
contingency funding, the GE budget actually decreased from $1,406.5 
million in the FY 2016/2017 fee review to $1,258.0 million in the FY 
2021 OP, a decrease of $148.5 million or 10.6 percent. As evidenced by 
the financial strains placed on USCIS by the COVID-19 pandemic, 
however, USCIS must maintain additional contingency funding to deal 
with emergent operational needs and provide funding in the event of 
unforeseen financial shortfalls and seasonal fluctuations in filing 
volumes and revenues.\64\ Additionally, GAO acknowledges that fee 
funded agencies may need to designate funds as operating reserves to 
weather periods when revenue collections are lower than costs.\65\ 
Therefore, USCIS decided to increase its contingency cost projection in 
the FY 2021 OP and maintain the same level in the fee review cost 
budget in case of continued negative effects from the pandemic. USCIS 
may use contingency funding to cover emergent costs from policy 
decisions, renegotiation of contracts, or new leases that were not 
included initially in the OP or in the projected biennial period's cost 
budget.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ General expenses (GE) refers to non-pay expenses, such as 
office equipment, technology, training, and travel.
    \64\ See USCIS, ``Deputy Director for Policy Statement on USCIS' 
Fiscal Outlook'' (June 25, 2020), https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/deputy-director-for-policy-statement-on-uscis-fiscal-outlook. See also USCIS, ``USCIS Averts Furlough of Nearly 70% of 
Workforce (Aug. 25, 2020), https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/uscis-averts-furlough-of-nearly-70-of-workforce.
    \65\ See U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal User 
Fees: Fee Design Options and Implications for Managing Revenue 
Instability (Sept. 30, 2013), https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-13-820.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The limited growth in USCIS' GE budget is the result of actions 
taken by USCIS to constrain cost growth. In response to reduction in 
applicant volume and associated revenues during the COVID-19 pandemic, 
USCIS implemented significant GE cost-saving measures in FY 2020 and FY 
2021. These cuts enabled USCIS to redirect resources to fund payroll 
and ensure that USCIS did not have to furlough any employees. These 
cuts included GE reductions of up to 32 percent across all USCIS 
offices, including a pause on new GE expenditure, reduced travel, 
implementing shorter periods of performance for contracts, and a freeze 
on implementing new contracts. Notable examples of GE budget decreases 
from FY 2016/2017 to FY 2021 include:
     $103.7 million (32 percent) decrease in IT equipment, 
software, and related contractor support;
     $36.8 million (52.2 percent) decrease in the USCIS Office 
of Citizenship and Applicant Information Services' (CAIS) GE budget, 
which included a reduction to the call center support contract and 
removal of Office of Citizenship grants that were included in the FY 
2016/2017 fee rule budget;
     $27.3 million (59.9 percent) decrease in travel and 
training across all USCIS offices; and
     $52.4 million (83 percent) decrease in Service Center 
Operations (SCOPS) contractor support.
    While USCIS will need to reverse some of the GE spending cuts it 
has made to ensure the continuation of its operations, USCIS projects 
that some of these cuts will be permanent, in an effort to limit cost 
growth and the increase in fees. Further details of restored GE budget 
cuts in the FY 2022/2023 fee review cost projections are found in 
section V.A.2.a of this preamble.
    In contrast to the limited growth in non-payroll expenses relative 
to the FY 2016/2017 fee review budget, USCIS' payroll costs have 
increased substantially due to an increase in staffing. The combined 
average IEFA non-premium payroll budget for the FY 2016/2017 fee review 
of $1,631.3 million increased by 41.6 percent to $2,309.3 million in 
the FY 2021 OP. USCIS experienced a significant increase in application 
volume during the FY 2016/2017 to FY 2021 period and adjusted its 
staffing requirements accordingly. The FY 2016/2017 fee review 
accounted for 14,543 fully funded positions, while as of pay period 6 
of FY 2021 (March 27, 2021) USCIS had 18,840 positions authorized to be 
funded with IEFA non-premium funds (an increase of 29.5 percent). This 
greater number of positions reflects increased operational demands on 
USCIS, including growth in workload volumes, growth in the time 
required

[[Page 428]]

per case which is in part driven by a combination of changing 
adjudication policy and length of the forms, and expanded 
responsibilities for other offices, such as Fraud Detection and 
National Security (FDNS), including social media vetting.\66\ Payroll 
budget increases from FY 2016/2017 to FY 2021 include:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ In 2004, USCIS established the Fraud Detection and National 
Security Directorate (FDNS) in response to a Congressional 
recommendation to establish an organization ``responsible for 
developing, implementing, directing, and overseeing the joint USCIS-
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) anti-fraud initiative and 
conducting law enforcement/background checks on every applicant, 
beneficiary, and petitioner prior to granting immigration 
benefits.'' See, Conference Report to accompany H.R. 4567 [Report 
108-774], ``Making Appropriations for the Department of Homeland 
Security for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2005,'' p. 74, 
available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-108hrpt774/pdf/CRPT-108hrpt774.pdf. The Fraud Prevention and Detection Account and the 
H-1B Nonimmigrant Petitioner Account are funded by statutorily set 
fees, and divided among USCIS (for fraud detection and prevention), 
the National Science Foundation, and the U.S. Department of Labor. 
See 8 U.S.C. 1356(v)(2)(B). FDNS is funded out of both the IEFA and 
the fraud detection and prevention account because the fees fixed by 
the statute are insufficient to cover the full costs of FDNS. The 
Fraud fee account revenue collections are divided in three thirds, 
one for the Department of State, one for the Department of Labor, 
and one for USCIS. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-108hrpt774/pdf/CRPT-108hrpt774.pdf. The Fraud Prevention and Detection Account 
and the H-1B Nonimmigrant Petitioner Account are funded by 
statutorily set fees, and divided among USCIS (for fraud detection 
and prevention), the National Science Foundation, and the U.S. 
Department of Labor. See 8 U.S.C. 1356(v)(2)(B). FDNS is funded out 
of both the IEFA and the fraud detection and prevention account 
because the fees fixed by the statute are insufficient to cover the 
full costs of FDNS. The Fraud fee account revenue collections are 
divided in three thirds, one for the Department of State, one for 
the Department of Labor, and one for USCIS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     New positions across all USCIS offices: $324.2 million 
(19.9 percent). Due to the operational impact of the COVID-19 pandemic 
and potential furlough of USCIS employees, FY 2020 and FY 2021 did not 
have any new authorized positions;
     Pay raises: $167.7 million (10.0 percent). Pay raises were 
1.3 percent in FY 2016 and 1.0 percent in FY 2021.\67\ The highest 
annual pay raise of 3.1 percent occurred in FY 2020; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ For a history of Federal salary data, see Office of 
Personnel Management (OPM), Policy, Data, Oversight: Pay and Leave 
available at https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/. OPM sets Federal salary levels, not DHS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Significant payroll increases due to an increase in 
staffing levels in these USCIS offices and directorates:
    [cir] Asylum Division: $49.7 million (40.2 percent);
    [cir] Field Office Directorate: $150.5 million (24.7 percent);
    [cir] FDNS: $91.4 million (73.6 percent); and
    [cir] SCOPS: $184.6 million (68.7 percent).
2. FY 2022/2023 Cost Projections
    In developing projected program needs for FY 2022/2023, USCIS used 
the FY 2021 operating plan (OP) as the starting point. Actual and 
anticipated changes from the FY 2021 OP are discussed in this section. 
Enacted funds from FY 2022 are not included in the projections. In 
addition, there are standard pay adjustments and increases to programs 
to maintain current services that are fairly standard in budget 
development. Examples of necessary adjustments include:
     Pay inflation and within-grade pay step increases ($2.67 
billion in FY 2022 and an additional $2.76 billion in FY 2023). The 
assumed Government-wide pay inflation rate for FY 2022 and FY 2023 is 
2.7 percent and 1.6 percent respectively.
     Staffing requirements ($315.7 million in FY 2022 and an 
additional $34.8 million in FY 2023). USCIS models staffing allocations 
and costs based on projected workload volumes. See section V.B. of this 
preamble for information on how workload and completion rates affect 
staffing. Staffing allocation model cost estimates are also influenced 
by position type, grade level and locality.
    Overall, the IEFA cost baseline increases by 35.3 percent in FY 
2022 and 37.4 percent in FY 2023 both relative to the FY 2021 OP. A 
detailed summary of adjustments to the FY 2021 OP that resulted in the 
projected budget requirements for FY 2022 and FY 2023 follows.
    Despite the growth in USCIS' IEFA non-premium budget from the 
levels projected in the FY 2016/2017 fee review to the levels in the FY 
2021 OP, USCIS remains underfunded to accomplish its operational 
objectives, and processing backlogs continue to grow. See section III.A 
of this preamble for information on supplemental appropriations for the 
backlog.\68\ USCIS projects that its IEFA non-premium cost projections 
must increase by 36.4 percent from $3,776.3 million in FY 2021 to an 
average of $5,150.7 million in FY 2022/2023 to fulfill USCIS' 
operational requirements. This increase in funding will ensure that 
USCIS is able to meet its operational needs during the biennial period. 
The following subsections provide more details on the required 
increases for the FY 2022/2023 cost projections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \68\ The appropriated funds will be focused mainly on reducing 
current backlogs and not on processing future requests. If USCIS 
does not increase revenue to meet the costs of timely adjudicating 
all incoming receipts as proposed in this rule, USCIS will not be 
able to keep up with demand and backlogs are likely to rematerialize 
despite the funds provided for clearing those requests on hand.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.014

a. General Expenses
    In the USCIS cost projections, GE represent all costs that are not 
related to pay or benefits of employees. USCIS estimates that its GE 
budget must increase by $335.8 million (22.9 percent) from $1,467.0 
million in FY 2021 to a combined average of $1,802.9 million in the FY 
2022/2023 fee review cost projections. Excluding contingency funding, 
USCIS projects the GE budget must increase from $1,258.0 million in

[[Page 429]]

FY 2021 to $1,592.7 million in FY 2022/2023, or 26.6 percent. This 
increase in GE is primarily the result of the planned reversal of 
reductions made in FY 2020 and FY 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. 
These reductions were necessary at the time to preserve the financial 
stability of USCIS, but some of them must be reversed to ensure that 
USCIS can adequately perform the adjudication and naturalization 
services that it is statutorily charged to administer. Notable examples 
of increases in the GE budget from FY 2021 to the FY 2022/2023 fee 
review average are projected to occur for these directorates and 
programs:
     SCOPS contractor support is projected to increase $41 
million (386.4 percent) above the FY 2021 level. The funding for SCOPS 
contractor support would revert close to the level projected in the FY 
2016/2017 fee rule because the FY 2021 level had been reduced due to 
funding constraints associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.
     GE is projected to increase by $35 million to support 
increased refugee processing associated with a proposed increase to the 
refugee ceiling.
     Immigration Records and Identity Services (IRIS) is 
projected to have additional FY 2022/2023 Federal Bureau of 
Investigation (FBI) fingerprint and background check service costs of 
$16.7 million based on FBI fees and workload estimates.
     In addition to the restoration of $13 million for 
Application Support Center (ASC) contract support, costs increase as 
USCIS restores ASC capacity following the COVID-19 pandemic. USCIS 
temporarily suspended in-person services between March 18, 2020 until 
June 4, 2020.\69\ ASC appointments that were cancelled due to the 
temporary office closure were rescheduled causing some individuals to 
experience significant processing delays. To reduce costs, the annual 
contract was deferred to nine months. The remaining three months were 
added to the 12-month optional period to resume in FY 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \69\ USCIS temporarily suspended in-person office services to 
help slow the spread of COVID-19 and ensure the safety of our staff 
and communities. These temporary closures and capacity limitations 
led to a substantial backlog of cases awaiting biometrics 
appointments. USCIS has since extended operating hours at high-
volume ASCs and adjusted biometrics submission requirements for 
certain applicants to address the backlogs. See USCIS, USCIS 
Temporarily Closing Offices to the Public March 18-April 1, https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-temporarily-closing-offices-to-the-public-march-18-april-1 (last updated Mar. 17, 2020); see also 
USCIS, USCIS Preparing to Resume Public Services on June 4, https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/alerts/uscis-preparing-to-resume-public-services-on-june-4 (last updated Sept. 16, 2001). At the date of 
publication of this proposed rule, ASC backlogs have mostly been 
eliminated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The Office of the Chief Information Officer's GE budget is 
projected to increase by $35.3 million (16 percent) to support the 
USCIS staffing requirements in the FY 2022/2023 fee review. The 
additional funding is required to provide IT support, equipment, and 
network services. This excludes projects funded from premium 
processing. As stated earlier, non-premium IEFA cost projections are 
the basis for the fee review budget.
     The budget includes an increase of $9.8 million at the 
National Records Center (NRC) to reduce the Freedom of Information Act 
(FOIA) backlog at the NRC in FY 2022/2023. DHS has requested 
appropriations to fund this additional spending. If USCIS receives 
appropriations, USCIS may be able to revise downward the cost 
projections funded by IEFA fees.
b. Payroll
    USCIS projects that it must increase its IEFA non-premium pay 
budget by $1,038.6 million (45 percent) from $2,309.3 million in FY 
2021 to $3,347.9 million in the FY 2022/2023 fee review period to meet 
its operational requirements. The payroll growth includes:
     Pay and benefit adjustments for onboard staff: $313.1 
million. USCIS budget projections include increased costs associated 
with the Government-wide cost of living adjustment (COLA) assumption of 
2.7 percent for FY 2022 and 1.6 percent for FY 2023.\70\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \70\ The FY 2022 COLA assumption is based on President Biden's 
``Letter to the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate 
on the Alternative Plan for Pay Adjustments for Civilian Federal 
Employment'', issued on August 27, 2021. See White House, ``Letter 
to the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate on the 
Alternative Plan for Pay Adjustments for Civilian Federal 
Employees'' (Aug. 27, 2021), https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/08/27/letter-to-the-speaker-of-the-house-and-the-president-of-the-senate-on-the-alternative-plan-for-pay-adjustments-for-civilian-federal-employees/. The FY 2023 COLA 
assumption is based on the available DHS Resource Allocation Plan 
(RAP) guidance as of March 29, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Pay and benefits for new staff: $590.0 million. Projected 
FY 2022 and FY 2023 workloads exceed current workload capacity by 10.2 
percent, thereby requiring additional staff. The FY 2022 and FY 2023 
Staffing Allocation Models (SAMs) \71\ estimated an additional 1,921 
positions are necessary to meet adjudicative processing goals and other 
USCIS mission objectives, including administrative functions. This 
additional staffing requirement reflects the fact that it takes USCIS 
longer to adjudicate many workloads than was planned for in the FY 
2016/2017 fee rule and that workload volumes and operational needs have 
grown. See section V.B. for information on how workload and completion 
rates affect staffing forecasts. Outside of the SAMs, USCIS has 
identified the need for another 2,035 new positions to accommodate the 
Asylum Processing interim final rule (IFR) and the proposed increase in 
the refugee admissions ceiling to 125,000. See section V.2.c. of this 
preamble for more information on how the Asylum Processing IFR, 87 FR 
18078 (Mar. 29, 2022), and other rulemakings affect the fee review 
budget.\72\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \71\ The SAMs are SAS-based workforce planning tools that 
estimate the staffing requirements necessary to adjudicate the 
projected volume of workload receipts (in other words, applications 
and petitions).
    \72\ On March 29, 2022, DHS and DOJ issued an interim final 
rule, Procedures for Credible Fear Screening and Consideration of 
Asylum, Withholding of Removal, and CAT Protection Claims by Asylum 
Officers (Asylum Processing IFR), to improve and expedite processing 
of asylum claims made by noncitizens subject to expedited removal, 
ensuring that those who are eligible for protection are granted 
protection quickly, and those who are not are promptly removed. The 
rule authorizes asylum officers within USCIS to consider the asylum 
applications of individuals subject to expedited removal who assert 
a fear of persecution or torture and pass the required credible fear 
screening. See 87 FR 18078.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Realignment of 1,157 positions into the non-premium IEFA 
budget: $135.5 million. This realignment includes moving 1,127 
positions from IEFA premium processing funding ($129.8 million) and 30 
positions that were previously funded by appropriated funds for the E-
Verify program ($5.7 million) to IEFA non-premium funding. The 1,127 
positions were temporarily funded out of the premium processing budget 
in the FY 2021 OP due to financial constraints. Funding these positions 
with IEFA non-premium resources will allow USCIS to redirect premium 
processing funds to infrastructure improvements, including investments 
in USCIS' digital capabilities, as well as backlog reduction efforts. 
USCIS is also realigning 30 positions from appropriated E-Verify 
program funding to IEFA non-premium funding to reflect the appropriate 
distribution of positions as identified in the Verification Division 
SAM. The SAM identified that the 30 positions are better attributed to 
the SAVE program, which is funded with IEFA non-premium funds. 
Therefore, USCIS accounts for these 30 positions as increased IEFA non-
premium costs.

[[Page 430]]

c. Related Rulemakings
    As stated elsewhere in this preamble with regard to the premium 
processing rule and the DACA NPRM, simultaneously with this rule, DHS 
is engaging in multiple rulemaking actions that are in various stages 
of development.\73\ See 86 FR 53736. DHS has considered and analyzed 
each of these other rules for peripheral, overlapping, or interrelated 
effects on this rule and has incorporated their effects, if any, into 
the supporting documentation, fee calculations, policies, and 
regulatory text for this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \73\ See Spring 2022 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and 
Deregulatory Actions, Agency Rule List-Spring 2022, Department of 
Homeland Security at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaMain?operation=OPERATION_GET_AGENCY_RULE_LIST&currentPub=true&agencyCode=&showStage=active&agencyCd=1600 (last accessed July 26, 
2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS is proposing changes to the USCIS fee schedule in this rule 
that may be necessary to implement the rule titled ``Procedures for 
Credible Fear Screening and Consideration of Asylum, Withholding of 
Removal, and CAT Protection Claims by Asylum Officers.'' See 87 FR 
18078 (Mar. 29, 2022) (Asylum Processing IFR). In the Asylum Processing 
IFR, DOJ and DHS amended the regulations governing the determination of 
certain protection claims raised by individuals subject to expedited 
removal and found to have a credible fear of persecution or torture. 
The changes are expected to improve the Departments' ability to 
consider the protection claims of individuals encountered at or near 
the border and placed into expedited removal more promptly while 
ensuring fundamental fairness.
    DHS includes an estimated cost of the Asylum Processing IFR in our 
calculation of the proposed fees to recover full costs of USCIS 
implementation of the rule. Consistent with the reasoning described in 
the Asylum Processing IFR, DHS has used the primary estimate of annual 
costs in the model used to calculate the fees in this rule.\74\ Use of 
this figure results in costs of an average $425.9 million per fiscal 
year during the biennial period.\75\ This funding, which is reflected 
in the figures above, would support 2,035 new staff and associated GE. 
These expenses constitute approximately 31 percent of the total 
projected increase in budgetary requirements from FY 2021 to FY 2022/
2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \74\ See 87 FR 18078 (Mar. 29, 2022), at 18206.
    \75\ DHS acknowledges that, by using the middle of the range of 
costs, if actual costs are higher than that, then the USCIS fee 
schedule will be set at a level that is less than what will be 
required to recover all of the costs added by the Asylum Processing 
IFR, all other factors remaining the same. Estimated annual costs of 
the Asylum Processing IFR (mid-range estimate): FY 2022 total costs 
of $438.2 million plus FY 2023 total costs of $413.6 million equals 
$851.8. See 86 FR 46933-46934. Average total costs of FY 2022/2023 
equal $425.9 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS proposes to include the middle of the three Asylum Processing 
IFR estimates to plan for these additional staff and other resources. 
Implementation of this rulemaking is subject to resource constraints, 
including available IEFA non-premium funding and revenue. When USCIS 
does not have the resources that it needs to meet its goals, processing 
times increase and the case processing backlog grows. USCIS evaluates 
its budget and revenue for operational purposes annually, separate from 
the fee review process. For example, as mentioned above, the OP is a 
budget for the current year and is separate from the fee review budget 
estimates for future years. If actual revenue in FY 2022 or FY 2023 is 
higher than the estimates included in this proposal, then USCIS may 
dedicate additional staff and resources to the Asylum Processing IFR. 
If actual revenue is lower than the estimates in this proposal, then 
USCIS may dedicate fewer resources to implementing the Asylum 
Processing IFR. Relatedly, if the ultimate costs of implementing the 
Asylum Processing IFR exceed the estimates included in this proposal, 
this will strain the resources available to USCIS and processing 
backlogs may grow. Future fee review budget estimates will consider 
current and planned DHS and USCIS policies.
    If USCIS identifies alternative funding mechanisms or resources for 
the Asylum Processing IFR other than IEFA non-premium funds, the fee 
review budget projections may be reduced accordingly. Therefore, with 
the implementation realities of the Asylum Processing IFR and possible 
congressional appropriations to fund that rule, DHS may reduce USCIS' 
estimated resource requirements for FY 2022/2023 and the fees necessary 
to generate those resources in a final fee rule.
d. Cost Summary
    Table 5 below is a crosswalk summary of the FY 2021 OP to the FY 
2022 and FY 2023 cost projections. It accounts for payroll and non-
payroll for on-board and new staff, other resource requirements or 
adjustments, and the removal of costs associated with temporary 
programs. The FY 2022/2023 IEFA non-premium average annual budget 
requirement is estimated to be $5,150.7 million. This represents a 
$1,374.4 million, or 36.4 percent, increase over the FY 2021 IEFA non-
premium budget of $3,776.3 million. As previously discussed, the 
primary cost driver is payroll, which accounts for 76 percent of the 
increase.

[[Page 431]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.015

3. FY 2022/2023 Revenue Projections
    USCIS' revenue projections are informed by internal immigration 
benefit request receipt forecasts agreed to by the USCIS Volume 
Projection Committee (VPC). See section V.B.1.a of this preamble for 
more information on the VPC.\76\ USCIS also uses 12 months of 
historical actual fee-paying receipts to account for fee-waiver and 
fee-exemption trends. To project USCIS IEFA non-premium revenue, USCIS 
develops application volume projections using all available data. USCIS 
then considers the fee-paying rate for each application and petition 
type to reflect the fact that not all applicants and petitioners pay 
fees due to fee waivers and fee exemptions. USCIS uses actual revenue 
collections from August 2019 to July 2020 as a basis for the fee-paying 
assumptions in the FY 2022/2023 revenue projections. See section V.B.1 
of this preamble for a more detailed discussion of USCIS volume 
projections and fee-paying rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \76\ USCIS has developed the VPC, a panel of agency experts, for 
systematic immigration benefit request filing volume forecasting for 
use in fee studies. USCIS has considered other business forecasting 
and structured forecasting approaches and models but has found that 
the VPC has a reliably accurate history of filing volume prediction. 
Two annual VPC meetings consider draft and final volume projections 
for several years ahead. One of three annual VPC meetings reviews 
the forecasts for the previous year, compares them to actual 
receipts, and discusses future improvements for greater accuracy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    USCIS' current fee schedule is expected to yield $3.28 billion of 
average annual revenue during the FY 2022/2023 biennial period. This 
represents an increase of $0.80 billion, or 32 percent, from the FY 
2016/2017 fee rule projection of $2.48 billion. See 81 FR 26911 (May 4, 
2016). The projected revenue increase is based on the fees established 
by 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 26923-26924. However, the 
FY 2022/2023 fee review forecasts 7,601,200 total workload receipts and 
6,510,442 fee-paying receipts. See section V.B.1. of this preamble for 
more information on the workload and fee-paying receipt forecasts. This 
represents a 29 percent increase to workload and 26 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 projected to be insufficient to recover USCIS' 
increased costs, as discussed in the next section.
4. Projected Cost 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 the projected full cost of 
providing immigration adjudication and naturalization services or 
whether a fee adjustment is necessary. Table 6 summarizes the projected 
cost and revenue differential. Non-Premium Revenue represents a revenue 
forecast using the current fees. Non-Premium Cost represents a budget 
forecast. In any fee review, if the revenue forecast is less than the 
budget forecast, then USCIS may propose new or increased fees to cover 
the budget-revenue shortfall. Otherwise, USCIS may reduce certain costs 
or services to cover the difference. Summary values may vary due to 
rounding.

[[Page 432]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.016

    Historically, and for the purpose of the fee review, USCIS reports 
costs and revenue as an average over the 2-year period. In Table 6, 
USCIS averages FY 2022 and FY 2023 costs and revenue 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 that if fees remained at their current levels, those fees 
would generate $3.28 billion in average annual revenue in FY 2022 and 
FY 2023. For the same period, the average annual cost of processing 
those immigration benefit requests and providing biometric services is 
$5.15 billion. This yields an average annual deficit of $1,868.2 
million. In other words, USCIS expects the costs of fulfilling its 
operation requirements in FY 2022/2023 will exceed projected total 
revenue under its current fee structure.
    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.

    Although USCIS continues to pursue efforts to increase agency 
efficiency, DHS believes that reducing the projected costs to equal the 
projected revenue would degrade USCIS operations funded by the IEFA; 
therefore, this is not a viable alternative to the proposed rule. The 
projected amount of funding necessary to meet USCIS' operational 
requirements would exceed USCIS' projected carryover in both FY 2022 
and FY 2023, so USCIS is not able to rely on those funds to cover the 
difference between projected revenue and costs.\77\ Likewise, USCIS 
estimates that recovered revenue from prior year obligations will be 
insufficient. USCIS estimates that it may recover $91.9 million in FY 
2022 and $94.2 million in FY 2023 for the non-premium IEFA. Therefore, 
DHS proposes to increase revenue through the fee adjustments described 
in detail throughout this rule. To the extent USCIS is successful in 
measurably reducing completion rates or achieving other productivity 
gains, DHS will re-evaluate the fee schedule in subsequent fee rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \77\ In the docket for this proposed rule, the supporting 
documentation has more information on carryover estimates. See the 
section titled IEFA Non-Premium Carryover Projections and Targets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 
ABC, a business management tool that assigns resource costs to 
operational activities and then to products, services, or both. USCIS 
uses commercially available ABC software to create financial models. 
These models determine the cost of each major step toward 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. For more information on these 
changes, please refer to the Changes Implemented in the FY 2022/2023 
Fee Review section of the supporting documentation located in the 
docket of this rule.
1. Volume
    USCIS uses two types of volume data in the fee review: workload and 
fee-paying 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 customers that 
will pay a fee when filing requests for immigration benefits. Not all 
customers pay a fee. Those customers to whom a fee exemption applies or 
for whom USCIS grants a fee waiver are represented in the workload 
volume, but not the fee-paying volume. Customers who pay a fee fund the 
cost of processing requests for fee-waived or fee-exempt immigration 
benefit requests. Tables 7 and 8 compare the FY 2016/2017 fee rule 
volume forecasts to the volume forecasts for this rulemaking similar to 
previous fee rules. See e.g., 81 FR 26922-26924. Actual receipts from 
prior years inform those forecasts, but they may not be the only reason 
for differences. We explain some of the larger differences in the 
paragraphs that follow Tables 7 and 8. For information on actual 
receipts from previous fiscal years, see Appendix Table 13 in the 
supporting documentation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \78\ DHS has considered the effects on this rule of all 
intervening legislation, related rulemakings, and policy changes 
that USCIS knows have occurred or will occur by the time the rule is 
signed. However, DHS does not and cannot assert that it knows and 
has considered every policy change that is planned or that may occur 
at all levels and agencies of the U.S. Government that may directly 
or indirectly affect this rule. Immigration policy changes 
frequently and USCIS must use the best cost data available at a 
point in time. Initiatives may come about without being incorporated 
in the proposed and final fees simply due to the time required for 
rule development and finalization. That necessary shortcoming is 
ameliorated by the CFO Act requirement that DHS address the effects 
of the constantly evolving immigration policy environment on its 
fees, costs, and services every 2 years, as DHS has done through its 
biennial fee reviews.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

a. Workload Volume and Volume Projection Committee
    USCIS uses statistical modeling, immigration receipt data, and 
internal assessments of future developments (such as planned 
immigration policy initiatives) \78\to develop workload volume 
projections. All relevant USCIS directorates and program offices are 
represented on the VPC. The VPC forecasts USCIS workload volume using 
statistical forecasts and subject-matter expertise from various 
directorates and program offices, including the service centers, 
National Benefits Center, RAIO, and regional, district, and field 
offices. Input from these offices helps refine the

[[Page 433]]

statistical 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 receipt 
data to determine patterns (such as level, trend, and seasonality) or 
correlations with historical events to forecast receipts. When 
possible, other, more detailed models are also used to determine 
relationships within and between different benefit request types. At 
VPC meetings, the committee members deliberate on the provided 
forecast, consider alternatives, and agree to a forecast by group 
consensus. 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 
\79\ in the USCIS ABC model. Previous fee reviews also relied on VPC 
forecasts.\80\ DHS explains some of the larger differences in the 
paragraphs after Table 7. Values below are the average of 2 years, 
rounded to whole numbers. There may be slight differences because of 
rounding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \79\ 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 programs. Accordingly, N/A is included in the average 
annual FY 2022/2023 projected workload receipts and difference 
columns for biometrics in Table 7.
    \80\ The FY 2010/2011 fee rule was the first to use VPC workload 
estimates in a fee review. See, USCIS, FY 2010/2011 Immigration and 
Examinations Fee Account Fee Review (June 11, 2010), available at 
https://www.regulations.gov/document/USCIS-2009-0033-0007. All 
subsequent fee reviews and fee rules used VPC estimates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

BILLING CODE 9111-97-P

[[Page 434]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.017


[[Page 435]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.018

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

    \81\ Combines both Forms I-526 and I-526E. USCIS revised Form I-
526 and created Form I-526E as a result of the EB-5 Reform and 
Integrity Act of 2022.

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

[[Page 436]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.019


[[Page 437]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.020

BILLING CODE 9111-97-C
    Differences between the two sets of workload estimates may be 
unrelated to any proposed fee or policy change. As mentioned earlier, 
these estimates are based on historical data, statistical analysis, and 
subject matter and policy input. For example, the Form I-90 forecast 
consists of two combined forecasts: renewals and replacements. Both 
Form I-90 forecasts use a time series model that allows for 
seasonality. As another example, the VPC establishes two Form N-400 
forecasts: civilian and military. The statistical model that the VPC 
considers for the civilian Form N-400 forecast leverages survival 
analysis to include individual microdata and reflects the differences 
in application patterns of previous naturalization applicants. USCIS' 
statistical model uses multiple factors to determine the likelihood of 
naturalization of members of the pool of potential applicants, 
including the length of time an individual has been a lawful permanent 
resident (LPR), as well as an individual's country of origin, visa 
type, and age. In contrast, the military naturalization forecast is a 
time series model that does not use survival analysis. USCIS evaluates 
a variety of models and methods to determine the best forecast for each 
workload based on the available data and historical trends.
    Some differences in workload are the result of proposed changes, in 
whole or in part. Part of the large differences for Forms I-131 and I-
765 relate to a proposed change to Form I-485 fees and interim 
benefits. See section VIII.H.1 for more information. In the FY 2016/
2017 fee review, USCIS determined the workload volume for Forms I-765 
and I-131 that are not associated with Forms I-485 (in other words, 
interim benefits). See 81 FR 26918 and 73300. The FY 2016/2017 column 
in Table 7 represents only the standalone workload for Forms I-131 and 
I-765 because all the interim benefit workloads bundled with Form I-485 
are counted in the row for Form I-485. The FY 2022/2023 column of Table 
7 includes workloads for Forms I-131 and I-765 that are either 
standalone or interim benefits concurrently filed with Form I-485. 
Other factors contributed to

[[Page 438]]

the differences, such as historical trends. There is no biometric 
services workload forecast for FY 2022/2023 (apart from the TPS 
workload, as discussed in section E.2 below) because of the proposal to 
incorporate the cost of providing biometric services in the underlying 
form fees, as explained in section VIII.E of this preamble.
    A comparison of the two sets of forecasts, in isolation, may not 
illustrate USCIS trends in the several years between fee reviews. For 
example, when USCIS estimated workload for the FY 2016/2017 fee rule, 
it had been several years since receipts for Form I-140 were over 
100,000. As such, the receipt estimate was reasonable at the time and 
consistent with receipts from FY 2009 to 2014. Since FY 2015, Form I-
140 receipts are routinely over 100,000. There could be a number of 
reasons for this change, such as availability of employment-based visas 
or increased demand following economic or policy changes in the 
intervening years. As another example, filing trends for Form I-539 
have changed significantly since the FY 2016/2017 fee rule. The 
forecast for FY 2022/2023 is based on Student and Exchange Visitor 
Information System data, which included 225,000 Form I-539 filings 
annually beginning in January 2021. DHS expects the vast majority of 
this workload to be optional practical training (OPT) and science, 
technology, engineering, and mathematics optional practical training 
(STEM OPT) extensions. As yet another example, the adoption workload 
has been trending downward for many years. Comparing only two data 
points in Table 7 does not show that the difference is just the 
continuation of a gradual trend over many years. Finally, Table 7 does 
not represent the entirety of USCIS workload. It excludes some 
workloads without fees. For example, asylum and refugee workloads 
(credible fear, reasonable fear, Forms I-589 and I-590) and other 
humanitarian workloads (for example, Forms I-914 and I-918) are 
excluded from the tables 7 and 8. These omitted workloads are part of 
the ABC model so that USCIS can estimate their total cost. However, 
only fee-paying volumes generate revenue for USCIS. See section III.C, 
Full Cost Recovery, of this preamble for more information. As explained 
later in this preamble, the proposed fees exclude temporary or 
uncertain workloads, such as TPS and DACA. See sections V.C. and V.D of 
this preamble.
b. Fee-Paying Volume
    USCIS uses historical revenue and receipt data to determine the 
number of individuals who paid a fee for each immigration or 
naturalization benefit request. Fee-paying percentages by form are 
usually steady year over year. USCIS uses monthly fee-paying 
percentages in its forecasts to capture seasonality during the year. 
Additionally, policy changes, legislation, and executive orders are 
frequently some of the factors that affect fee-paying percentages, so 
older historical data to calculate the percentages can be counter-
productive. In this proposed rule, USCIS therefore referenced revenue 
and receipts data from August 2019 to July 2020 for fee-paying figures. 
Total revenue for an immigration benefit request is divided by its fee 
to determine the historical number of fee-paying immigration benefit 
requests. Fee-paying 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.\82\ DHS explains some of the larger 
differences in the paragraphs after Table 8. Values below are the 
average of two years, rounded to whole numbers. There may be slight 
differences because of rounding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \82\ Table 8 compares the projections from the FY 2016/2017 fee 
rule with the projections of the FY 2022/2023 fee review. As 
discussed, these projections are based on a number of factors, 
including historical data of actual receipts. Although the FY 2016/
2017 Fee Review differs to some degree from the actual receipts 
since the 2016 fee rule, USCIS compares fee projections against each 
other, rather than against actual receipts, to ensure consistency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

BILLING CODE 9111-97-P

[[Page 439]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.021


[[Page 440]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.022

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

    \83\ Combines both Forms I-526 and I-526E. USCIS revised Form I-
526 and created Form I-526E as a result of the EB-5 Reform and 
Integrity Act of 2022.

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

[[Page 441]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.023


[[Page 442]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.024

    All fee-paying workload is a subset of total workload, as discussed 
in the previous section. As such, changes to workload may affect the 
fee-paying projections. As explained above, USCIS estimates fee-paying 
receipts by applying a percentage of fee-paying receipts to the 
workload forecast. For a general explanation on how fee-paying volumes 
affect fees, see section VI, Fee Waivers, of this preamble. Some 
differences in fee-paying projections are the result of proposed 
changes, in whole or in part. For example, part of the large 
differences between the past and current projections for Forms I-131 
and I-765 relate to the proposed change to Form I-485 fees and interim 
benefits. See section VIII.H.1 for more information. In the FY 2016/
2017 fee review, USCIS determined the fee-paying volume for Forms I-765 
and I-131 that are not associated with Forms I-485. See 81 FR 26918 and 
73300. The FY 2016/2017 column in Table 8 represents the forecasted 
standalone fee-paying receipts only for Forms I-131 and I-765 because 
all interim benefit fee-paying receipts bundled with Form I-485 are 
counted in the row for Form I-485. See 81 FR 26919 and 26924. The FY 
2022/2023 column of Table 8 includes fee-paying receipts for Forms I-
131 and I-765 that are either standalone or interim benefits 
concurrently filed with Form I-485. Other factors contributed to the 
differences, such as historical trends. There is no workload forecast 
for biometric services for FY 2022/2023 because of the proposed 
elimination of the discrete biometric services fee for most benefit 
requestors, as explained in section VIII.E of this preamble.
    Table 9 is a comparison of fee-paying percentages in the FY 2016/
2017 fee rule and this proposed rule. It divides the fee-paying volumes 
in Table 8 by the workload volumes in Table 7 to calculate the fee-
paying percentages. There may be slight differences because of 
rounding.

[[Page 443]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.025


[[Page 444]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.026


[[Page 445]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.027


[[Page 446]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.028

2. Completion Rates
    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 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 most employees who adjudicate immigration benefit 
requests to report adjudication hours and case completions by benefit 
type. The reported hours and counts are aggregate information that does 
not allow USCIS to estimate effects of individual policy changes. USCIS 
calculates completion rates by dividing the adjudication hours by the 
number of completions for the same period. As such, completion rates 
represent an average hours per completion. In addition to using these 
data to determine fees, completion rates help determine appropriate 
staffing allocations to handle projected workload. The USCIS Office of 
Performance and Quality (OPQ), field offices, regional management, and 
service centers continually review the data to capture updates or 
implementation of new processes and ensure continued accuracy. The 
continual availability of the information enables USCIS to update cost 
information for each fee review. The completion rates may change 
between fee reviews based on more recently reported hours and counts. 
Possible reasons for completion rate changes include changes to a form, 
policy changes, and more recently, effects of the pandemic. USCIS 
relied on completion rates before the pandemic to remove this effect 
from the fee review. When employees who adjudicate immigration benefit 
requests do not report adjudication hours, USCIS uses subject-matter 
expertise to estimate completion rates.
    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:
     I-131A, Application for Carrier Documentation. In this 
proposed rule, DHS anticipates that the Department of State (DOS) 
Bureau of Consular Affairs, located outside of the United States, would 
process all Form I-131A workload. Thus, USCIS projects it will have no 
hours or workload for Form I-131A in FY 2022/2023 and does not 
calculate a completion rate for this proposed rule.
     H-1B Registration Process. Before a petitioner is eligible 
to file an H-1B cap-subject petition (including those eligible for the 
20,000-petition advanced degree exemption), the prospective petitioner 
must register electronically through the USCIS website and have their 
registration selected. See 84 FR 888 (Jan. 31, 2019). USCIS does not 
adjudicate registrations received through the H-1B registration process 
because the process is automated.
     USCIS Immigrant Fee. USCIS does not adjudicate 
applications for an immigrant visa. Rather, individuals located outside 
of the United States apply with a DOS consular officer for an

[[Page 447]]

immigrant visa. If DOS issues the immigrant visa, the individual may 
apply with a Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officer at a port of 
entry for admission to the United States as an immigrant. This fee 
represents USCIS' costs to create and maintain files and to issue 
permanent resident cards (also known as ``Green Cards'') to individuals 
who go through this process. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(D) (Oct. 1, 
2020), proposed 8 CFR 106.2(c)(3).
     TPS. DHS proposes not to rely on TPS fee revenue for 
recovering USCIS' operational expenses, consistent with previous fee 
rules. See 81 FR 73312-73313. TPS designations may be terminated under 
current law or may decrease 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. 
Therefore, USCIS excludes the completion rate, as well as workload 
volumes and marginal costs, for Form I-821, Application for Temporary 
Protected Status, and associated Form I-765 filings from discussion in 
this proposed rule. DHS cannot increase the $50 initial statutory 
registration fee permitted under INA sec. 244(c)(1)(B) or establish a 
re-registration fee for TPS. Therefore, to recover some of the costs of 
administering the TPS program, USCIS will continue to charge the 
biometric services fee, where required, and the fee for an employment 
authorization document (EAD), as permitted under 8 U.S.C. 1254b.

[[Page 448]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.029

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

    \84\ See USCIS, Questions and Answers: Credible Fear Screening 
available at https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-and-asylum/asylum/questions-and-answers-credible-fear-screening (last updated 
July 15, 2015).
    \85\ USCIS does not track distinct refugee travel document 
completion rates, nor does it track rates by applicant age group. 
The completion rate here is for a re-entry permit, a similar travel 
document.

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

[[Page 449]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.030


[[Page 450]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.031

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

    \86\ See USCIS, Questions and Answers: Reasonable Fear 
Screening, available at https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-and-asylum/asylum/questions-and-answers-reasonable-fear-screenings 
(last updated June 18, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

BILLING CODE 9111-97-C
3. Assessing Proposed Fees
    Historically, as a matter of policy, DHS has used 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 ABC model output levels. Previous proposed IEFA fee schedules 
referred to limited fee increases as ``low volume reallocation'' or 
``cost reallocation.'' \87\ Despite the two separate phrases, the 
calculation for both is the same. In this proposed rule, DHS will use 
the phrase ``cost reallocation.'' In the FY 2016/2017 fee rule, USCIS 
calculated an 8 percent limited fee increase for certain immigration 
benefit request fees.\88\ For this proposed rule, USCIS calculated a 
limited fee increase of approximately 18 percent using a similar 
methodology as the FY 2016/2017 fee rule.\89\ The 18 percent is 
approximately the difference between the average current fee compared 
to the average ABC model output. The sum of the current fees, 
multiplied by the projected FY 2022/2023 fee-paying receipts for each 
immigration benefit type, divided by the total fee-paying receipts, is 
$518. The model output is the total cost determined by the ABC model by 
fee-paying receipts to determine a fee-paying unit cost. The sum of the 
ABC model outputs, multiplied by the projected FY 2022/2023 receipts 
for each immigration benefit type, divided by the fee-paying receipts, 
is $614. There is a $96 or approximate 18 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 genealogy fees. When DHS proposes to maintain the current fee, 
it affects this calculation. In those cases, the formula multiplies the 
current fee by fee-paying receipts instead of using the model output. 
Except for Form I-90 filed online, the estimated volumes are low for 
the fees that DHS proposes to maintain at the current level. As such, 
if DHS did not propose to maintain those current fees, the result would 
round to 17 percent. Thus, DHS has determined that 18 percent is a 
reasonable figure at which to cap those requests for which USCIS 
proposes to limit fee increases using the cost reallocation calculation 
method.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \87\ The 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.
    \88\ 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 fee-paying receipts. While each fee 
review may calculate a different percentage, the formula for the 
calculation remains the same.
    \89\ In the docket for this proposed rule, the supporting 
documentation has more information on the proposed cost reallocation 
and the ABC model output. See the Cost Reallocation column of 
Appendix Table 4: Proposed Fees by Immigration Benefit Request. The 
docket also includes documentation for the fee schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, in consideration of the need to balance the 
beneficiary-pays and ability-to-pay principles and to achieve important 
policy outcomes (for example, promoting naturalization, funding asylum 
and other humanitarian programs, and making immigration benefits 
affordable and accessible), DHS proposes that the increase in the 
following immigration benefit request fees is limited to 18 percent for 
the current fees:
     Form I-192, Application for Advance Permission to Enter as 
Nonimmigrant.
     Form I-193, Application for Waiver of Passport and/or 
Visa.
     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.\90\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \90\ DHS explains the purpose of this proposed form in section 
VIII.N.4 of this preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Form I-612, Application for Waiver of the Foreign 
Residence Requirement (Under Section 212(e) of the INA, as Amended).
     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.
     Form I-881, Application for Suspension of Deportation or 
Special Rule Cancellation of Removal.
     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 Hearing on a Decision in 
Naturalization Proceedings.
     Form N-400, Application for Naturalization.
     Form N-470, Application to Preserve Residence for 
Naturalization Purposes.
     Form N-600, Application for Certificate of Citizenship.
     Form N-600K, Application for Citizenship and Issuance of 
Certificate Under Section 322.
    The proposed increase of approximately 18 percent may vary slightly 
due to rounding. DHS rounds

[[Page 451]]

all IEFA non-premium fees to the nearest $5 increment.
    For many of these form types, DHS and DOJ have a long history of 
special consideration for these immigration and naturalization fees. 
For example, DOJ did not change fees for Forms I-290B, I-360, N-300, N-
336, N-470 in the first IEFA fee rule that used ABC modeling. See 63 FR 
1775 (Jan. 12, 1998) at 1784 (proposed rule); 63 FR 43604 (final rule). 
DOJ maintained the prior fee for these forms until it could capture 
sufficient information for these low (less than 10,000 per year) volume 
forms to change the fees in a separate rulemaking. See 64 FR 69883 
(Dec. 15, 1999). DHS has a history of setting adoption-related fees 
lower than the amount suggested by the fee-setting methodology, as 
discussed in section VIII.N.1 of this proposed rule. DHS also has a 
long history of special consideration for naturalization fees, as 
discussed in section VIII.F. of this preamble.
    To allow the proposed fee schedule to recover full cost, DHS 
proposes that other fees be increased to offset the difference between 
the projected cost of adjudicating these benefit requests and the 
revenue generated by the 18 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. In this proposed rule, DHS 
refers to the process of recovering full cost for workloads without 
fees or the shifting of cost burdens among benefit request fees due to 
other policy considerations as cost reallocation.
    DHS proposes to maintain the current fee for several benefit 
requests. These proposed fees would have decreased based on the ABC 
model results. However, DHS proposes to maintain the current fees. This 
will allow these forms to fund some of the costs of other forms and may 
limit the fee increase suggested by the fee calculation model for those 
other forms. In this proposed rule, DHS proposes to not change the 
following fees:
     Form I-90, Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card 
when filed online.
     Form I-131A, Application for Travel Document (Carrier 
Documentation).
     Form I-191, Application for Relief Under Former Section 
212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
     Form I-698, Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to 
Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A of the INA).
     Form N-565, Application for Replacement Naturalization/
Citizenship Document.
    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, as explained 
below. For example, previous fee schedules limited the increase for the 
immigration benefit requests associated with Forms I-212, I-601, I-
601A, and I-765.\91\ See 81 FR 26915-26916. In the FY 2016/2017 fee 
rule, DHS stopped limiting the fee increase for inadmissibility waivers 
like Forms I-212 and I-601. See 81 FR 73306-73307. In addition, in this 
proposed rule, DHS proposes not to limit the fee increase to 18 percent 
for the following immigration benefit requests:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \91\ See section VIII.F, Naturalization and Citizenship-Related 
Forms (discussion on the proposed naturalization fees).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Form I-601A, Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver; and
     Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization.
    DHS is not proposing to limit the fee increases for these two 
immigration benefit requests because, if we did, then other proposed 
fees would have to increase to recover full cost. For example, DHS 
limited the fee increase for Form I-765 in the FY 2016/2017 fee rule 
for humanitarian and practical reasons. See 81 FR 26916. Many 
individuals seeking immigration benefits face financial obstacles and 
cannot earn money through lawful employment in the United States until 
they receive an EAD. In this rule, DHS proposes additional fee 
exemptions instead of limiting the proposed fee for Form I-765. If DHS 
were to propose limited fee increases for all of the immigration 
benefit request fees that were limited in the FY 2016/2017 fee rule, 
then some proposed fees could increase by as much as $2,855, with the 
average of those changes being an increase of $79 per immigration 
benefit request. The rationale for some of these proposed changes is 
further discussed later in the preamble. See section VIII, Other 
Proposed Changes in the FY 2022/2023 Fee Schedule.
    Later in this preamble, DHS discusses the proposal for separate 
online and paper filing fees. See section VIII.G. DHS bases the 
proposed separate online and paper fees on ABC model results. When DHS 
proposes limited fee increases or to continue using the current fee, 
the calculation is based on the current fee instead of ABC model 
results. As such, there are not separate proposed fees for online and 
paper filing for immigration benefit requests with limited fee 
increases or for those held to the current fee.
4. Funding the Asylum Program With Employer Petition Fees
    DHS proposes a new Asylum Program Fee of $600 to be paid by 
employers who file either a Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant 
Worker, or Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker. Proposed 8 
CFR 106.2(c)(13). DHS proposes this new fee as a way to mitigate the 
scope of the proposed fee increases in this rule for individual 
applicants and petitioners. DHS has determined that the Asylum Program 
Fee is an effective way to shift some costs to requests that are 
generally submitted by petitioners who have more ability to pay, as 
opposed to shifting those costs to all other fee payers. DHS arrived at 
the amount of the Asylum Program Fee by calculating the amount that 
would need to be added to the fees for Form I-129, Petition for a 
Nonimmigrant Worker, and Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien 
Worker, to collect the Asylum Processing IFR estimated annual 
costs.\92\ See Table 11 for details on the calculation. The Asylum 
Program Fee may be used to fund part of the costs of administering the 
entire asylum program and would be due in addition to the fee those 
petitioners would pay using USCIS' standard costing and fee calculation 
methodologies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \92\ DHS notes that in section V.A.2.c of this preamble it 
identified the costs of the Asylum Processing IFR as averaging 
$425.9 million annually over FY 2022/2023. That figure represents 
the estimated costs that are directly attributable to the 
implementation of that rule. DHS divided this cost estimate by the 
estimated fee-paying volume for Forms I-129 and I-140 to determine 
the $600 Asylum Program Fee. Calculation: $425,900,395/708,630 = 
$601.02. DHS rounded to the nearest $5, consistent with other 
proposed fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

BILLING CODE 9111-97-P

[[Page 452]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.032

BILLING CODE 9111-97-C
    This Asylum Program Fee adds a fee for Form I-129 and Form I-140 
petitioners of $600 while maintaining lower proposed fees for other 
immigration benefit requestors than would be proposed if the costs were 
spread among all other fee payers. For example, charging the Asylum 
Program Fee only to employer petitions reduces the proposed Form I-485 
fee by $170 compared to a fee schedule without the cost shift. 
Similarly, the proposed fee to file Form I-765 on paper is $70 less 
than it would be absent the proposed Asylum Program Fee. The proposed 
fees for Forms I-485, I-765, and others are lower in a scenario with 
the shift of asylum program costs to employers through the new fee 
because all IEFA non-premium fees are related. Each fee helps recover 
the cost of work without fees (Forms I-589, I-590, I-914, I-918, etc.) 
or work with fees that do not recover full cost (Forms N-400, I-600, I-
800, etc.). If Forms I-129 and I-140 recover more of those costs, then 
that means other forms need not recover as much, resulting in lower 
proposed fees for Forms I-485, I-765, and others that recover more than 
full cost in this proposal. Table 12 shows the proposed IEFA non-
premium fees for Forms I-129 and I-140, including the Asylum Program 
Fee. The table excludes additional statutory or premium-processing fees 
that petitioners may pay for these immigration benefit requests.\93\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \93\ Most petitioners using Forms I-129 and I-140 may request 
expedited processing for an additional $2,500 or $1,500 premium 
processing fee. See USCIS, I-907, Request for Premium Processing 
Service, https://www.uscis.gov/i-907 (last updated Sep. 30, 2021). 
Certain H-1B and L petitions may have to pay up to $6,000 in 
additional statutory fees, which DHS is unable to adjust. USCIS does 
not keep most of the revenue of these fees. 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 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. 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-petition-nonimmigrant-worker (last 
updated Feb. 20, 2018).

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

[[Page 453]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.034

BILLING CODE 9111-97-C
    The proposed $600 Asylum Program Fee would apply to all fee-paying 
receipts for Forms I-129, I-129CW, and I-140. For example, it would 
apply to all initial petitions, changes of status, and extensions of 
stay that use Form I-129.
    DHS acknowledges that the scope of the proposed fee increases in 
this rule is significant. DHS proposes this cost shifting approach with 
the Asylum Program Fee to place greater emphasis on the ability-to-pay 
principle for determining user fees. Petitioners for immigrant and 
nonimmigrant workers generally are required to have the resources 
necessary to pay the worker(s) for whom the petition is filed, and the 
fees that the employer must pay USCIS to file a petition are not 
significant compared to even a small \94\ petitioner's revenue and 
profit. That determination is not changed by the proposed Asylum 
Program Fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \94\ Small is defined by U.S. Small Business Administration 
Guidelines. See Small Entity Analysis for the FY22/23 U.S. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services Fee Schedule Proposed Rule in 
Supporting Documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS considered proposing to transfer the costs of other 
humanitarian programs, such as the T, U, VAWA, SIJ, and refugee 
programs, to those who file benefit requests that may be able to better 
afford to pay fees. DHS recognizes, however, that we have always spread 
costs of free services that USCIS provides across all other fee-paying 
requests in the past and we have never directly transferred the costs 
of one program to another. See, e.g., 85 FR 46869 (stating, ``For the 
fees that DHS does not limit, we use the total cost for each form to 
reallocate the cost of limited fee increases or workload without 
fees.''); 75 FR 58973 (Stating, ``To the extent not supported by 
appropriations, the cost of providing free or reduced services must be 
transferred to all other fee-paying applicants.''); 72 FR 29865 
(stating, ``As with any other waiver, the loss of that fee revenue 
would necessarily be spread across all other benefit applications and 
petitions, having the potential to increase those fees.''). After 
considering the impact on all of the fees calculated by the model, DHS 
is proposing that the Asylum Program Fee for Forms I-129 and I-140 is 
the appropriate place to shift some of the costs of the asylum.
    DHS does not propose this Asylum Program Fee without having 
carefully considered its implications and effects. DHS realizes that 
some petitioners will object to funding the costs of USCIS-administered 
programs to which they have no connection or from which they receive no 
direct benefit. DHS is committed to reducing barriers and promoting 
accessibility to immigration benefits, and knows that the beneficiaries 
of Forms I-129 and I-140 fuel our economy, contribute to our arts, 
culture, and government, and have helped the United States lead the 
world in science, technology, and innovation. DHS is also aware that 
Forms I-129 and I-140 are submitted by non-profit entities, 
organizations performing research for government agencies, as well as 
farms, small businesses, and individuals. DHS appreciates that non-
profit or small entities may not have the same level of financial 
resources as many large, for-profit corporations that also submit 
petitions for foreign workers. In our Small Entity Analysis (SEA) for 
this proposed rule, we provide samples of the I-129 and I-140 forms, 
and how the fees may impact the small entities with the Asylum Program 
Fee. Within the SEA, DHS determined the average impacts to employers 
who file a petition based on their total revenue and profits. For Form 
I-129, approximately 90 percent of the small entities in the sample 
experienced an economic impact of less than 1 percent of their reported 
revenue. For Form I-140, approximately 98 percent of the small entities 
in the sample experienced an economic impact of less than 1 percent of 
their reported revenue. USCIS acknowledges that those small entities 
with greater than 1 percent impact may file fewer petitions as a result 
of this proposed rule. As previously indicated, the success of the 
USCIS fee model and this rulemaking in generating the necessary revenue 
depends on the filing volumes not falling short of those projected 
herein. At the same time, USCIS is charged with administering the 
asylum program using fee revenue and must make considered judgments 
about how to fund it using available and appropriate means. Balancing 
both of those goals, and

[[Page 454]]

considering the resources of the Form I-129 and I-140 filing 
communities, DHS decided to propose this surcharge. DHS will re-
evaluate the Asylum Program Fee based on the status of the Asylum 
Processing IFR and any funding appropriated for it when DHS develops 
its final fee rule.

C. Exclusion of Temporary or Uncertain Programs

    As stated in section V.B.1.b. of this preamble, the success of the 
fees established by this rulemaking in providing the funding necessary 
to sustain USCIS service levels depends on the projected volume of fee-
paying requests filed after this rule takes effect being at or near the 
level projected. If a program is ended, is partially curtailed, or 
substantially declines, USCIS is at risk of not achieving the projected 
and necessary revenue. Therefore, USCIS excludes from the fee 
calculation model the costs and revenue associated with programs that 
are temporary by definition or where it is possible that the program 
will diminish or cease to exist. This exclusion includes Form I-821, 
Application for Temporary Protected Status, and Form I-821D, 
Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, as well as the 
Form I-765 filings and biometrics fees associated with both programs.
    DHS excludes projected revenue from expiring or temporary programs 
in setting the fees required to support baseline operations due to the 
uncertainty associated with such programs. For example, the Secretary 
may designate a foreign country for TPS due to conditions in the 
country that temporarily prevent the country's nationals from returning 
safely, or in certain circumstances where the country is temporarily 
unable to adequately handle the return of its nationals. TPS, however, 
is a temporary benefit, and TPS designations may be terminated. See INA 
sec. 244(b)(3)(B), 8 U.S.C. 1254a(b)(3)(B). Likewise, DACA allows 
certain individuals who meet specific guidelines to request 
consideration of deferred action from USCIS for a specified period 
unless terminated. DACA is an administrative exercise of enforcement 
discretion and is implemented at the discretion of DHS, given that it 
has insufficient resources to enforce the immigration laws against 
every noncitizen without lawful immigration status. Because DACA is 
temporary act of enforcement discretion and may be terminated, it is 
excluded from this fee review, as discussed further in the next 
section.
    DHS excludes the costs and revenue associated with these programs 
because program eligibility is subject to the discretion of the 
Department. Because the future of these programs is difficult to 
predict, as discussed later in this section, USCIS has excluded the 
cost and workload of these programs from the fee review and does not 
propose to allocate overhead and other fixed costs to these workload 
volumes. This mitigates an unnecessary revenue risk. In other words, if 
DHS established the USCIS fee schedule based on revenue from these 
programs, and the eligible programs diminish or cease to exist, USCIS 
will not realize the projected revenue and would not have enough 
revenue to recover full cost of overhead and other fixed costs. USCIS 
analyzes variable unit costs associated with processing these benefit 
types and uses volume forecasts to exclude their costs from the fee 
review budget and ABC model.
    All fee revenue deposited into the IEFA is pooled and collectively 
used to finance USCIS operations including DACA, TPS, and other 
temporary programs. USCIS also responds to surges in customer demand 
for services by realigning resources to cover the cost of processing. 
Consequently, USCIS is capable of funding these programs even though 
their costs are not included in the fee review budget or ABC model. By 
excluding programs that are temporary by nature, DHS maintains the 
integrity of the ABC model, better ensures recovery of full costs, and 
mitigates revenue risk from unreliable sources. This approach is 
consistent with prevailing guidance on the subject as stated by 
Principle 6 of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) Greenbook, 
Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (``The 
Greenbook'').\95\ Principle 6 provides guidance on objectives and risks 
and advises managers to determine the acceptable level of variation in 
performance relative to the achievement of objectives. For example, in 
FY 2020, there were 647,278 active DACA recipients. See 86 FR 53785. 
DHS estimates that there will be 720,093 active DACA recipients in FY 
2023.\96\ If DHS were to include the DACA renewals in the fee review, 
it would be one of the larger populations. For example, in FY 2023, 
USCIS estimates that 573,563 individuals will request either initial or 
renewal DACA.\97\ However, on October 5, 2022, the U.S. Court of 
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed, in part, a July 2021 decision 
of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas declaring 
the 2012 DACA policy unlawful, but remanded the case to the District 
Court for further consideration of the recently published DACA final 
rule.\98\ TPS volumes can vary significantly by fiscal year. In FY 
2022, USCIS collected approximately $5.6 million in revenue for Form I-
821, and USCIS forecasts 626,770 receipts for Form I-821 in FY 2023. 
Nevertheless, DHS cannot predict the disasters or crises that lead to 
new TPS designations. DHS can reliably predict TPS renewals if existing 
designations are not terminated; however, renewals are often on an 18-
month cycle that does not align with Federal fiscal years. Including 
volume forecasts that are so variable by fiscal year may result in 
inaccurate fee calculations, especially over a long term. As such, DHS 
determined that including temporary or uncertain programs in the fee 
structure would exceed an acceptable level of risk for the success of 
this fee rule. Adding TPS and DACA costs, volumes, and revenue to the 
fee review would lower the fee for Form I-765 if its fee is calculated 
to recover full cost. However, if a certain country's TPS designation 
is terminated or if DACA ceases, basing the Form I-765 fee on that 
projected value leaves USCIS at a risk of not achieving projected 
revenue and the objectives of this proposed rule. Thus, consistent with 
four previous fee rules, DHS proposes to exclude from this rule the 
costs and revenue from programs that are susceptible to large 
reductions in filing volume.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \95\ The Green Book sets internal control standards for Federal 
entities. Internal control is a process used by management to help 
an entity achieve its objectives, run its operations efficiently and 
effectively, report reliable information about its operations and 
comply with applicable laws and regulations. See GAO, Standards for 
Internal Control in the Federal Government (Sep. 10, 2014), https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-14-704g.
    \96\ 87 FR 53275 (Aug. 30, 2022).
    \97\ 87 FR 53277 (Aug. 30, 2022).
    \98\ Texas v. United States, 50 F.4th 498 (5th Cir. 2022). The 
Fifth Circuit, however, preserved the partial stay issued by the 
district court in July 2021 (Texas v. United States, 549 F. Supp. 3d 
572, 624 (S.D. Tex. 2021) while the case is on remand to the 
District Court for further proceedings regarding the new DACA rule. 
While the stay remains in place, current grants of DACA and related 
Employment Authorization Documents are valid. USCIS will accept and 
process renewal DACA requests but not process initial DACA requests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Consideration of DACA Rulemaking

    On August 30, 2022, DHS published a final rule, Deferred Action for 
Childhood Arrivals, 87 FR 53152 (DACA rule). DHS has considered this 
rule and the DACA rule's possible effects on each other when developing 
this proposed rule. Because the specific costs and revenue associated 
with DACA are not separately identified in this proposed rule, each 
rule is

[[Page 455]]

independent and DHS estimates that the DACA rule will have no effects 
on this rule or vice versa. The DACA rule interacts with this rule only 
to the extent that the DACA rule established an $85 fee for Form I-821D 
at 8 CFR 106.2(a)(38) and this rule proposes to move that fee to 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(49).

E. Fee-Related Issues for Consideration

    DHS identified a number of issues that do not affect the FY 2022/
2023 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. To better inform this and future fee-
setting policies and rules, DHS welcomes comments on all facets of the 
FY 2022/2023 fee review, this proposed rule, and USCIS fees in general, 
regardless of whether changes have been proposed here.
1. Accommodating E-Filing and Form Flexibility
    DHS attempts, as it did in the FY 2010/2011 fee rule, FY 2016/2017 
fee rule, and the 2020 fee rule, to propose fees based on form titles 
instead of form numbers to avoid prescribing fees in a manner that 
could undermine the adoption by USCIS of electronic processing. See 
proposed 8 CFR part 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. DHS has worked for 
over a decade to remove unnecessary administrative and procedural 
provisions from title 8 of the CFR so as not to face restrictions such 
as using a certain form number for a benefit request codified with the 
force of law. As USCIS modernizes its processes and systems to allow 
more applicants, petitioners, and requestors to file benefit requests 
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 labeling 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 
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 each for advance parole, humanitarian 
parole, refugee travel documents, or re-entry permits. In this example, 
USCIS could continue to charge the current Form I-131 fee for each 
separate form. 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 Projected Cost and Revenue Differential section 
of this preamble, USCIS anticipates having insufficient resources to 
process its projected workload absent this fee rule. For FY 2022/2023, 
USCIS estimates that backlogs will continue to grow in the absence of 
additional resources. Although USCIS has implemented measures to reduce 
the backlog as described in section IX.C., USCIS net processing 
backlogs have grown from approximately 1.4 million cases in December 
2016, when DHS last adjusted IEFA non-premium fees, to approximately 
8.0 million cases at the end of September 2021.\99\ On top of these 
pre-existing strains on USCIS, the COVID-19 pandemic constrained USCIS 
adjudication capacity by limiting the ability of USCIS to schedule 
normal volumes of interviews and biometrics appointments while 
maintaining social distancing standards, contributing to the backlog. 
Further, USCIS believes that the growing complexity of case 
adjudications in past years, including prior increases in the number of 
interviews required and request for evidence (RFE) volumes, has 
contributed to higher completion rates and growing backlogs. See 
section V.B.2, Completion Rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \99\ See USCIS, Number of Service wide Forms By Quarter, Form 
Status, and Processing Time Fiscal Year 2021, Quarter 4, https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/data/Quarterly_All_Forms_FY2021Q4.pdf (last visited Jan. 11, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    USCIS is reviewing its adjudication and administrative policies to 
find efficiencies, while strengthening the integrity of the immigration 
system. This entails evaluating the utility of interview requirements, 
biometrics submission requirements, RFEs, deference to previous 
decisions, and other efforts that USCIS believes may, when implemented, 
reduce the amount of adjudication officer time required, on average, 
per case. Any improvements in these completion rates would, all else 
equal, reduce the number of staff and financial resources USCIS 
requires. Furthermore, USCIS is actively striving to use its existing 
workforce more efficiently, by investigating ways to devote a greater 
share of adjudication officer time to adjudications, rather than 
administrative work. All else being equal, increasing the average share 
of an officer's time spent on adjudication (that is, utilization rate) 
would increase the number of adjudications completed per officer and 
reduce USCIS' overall staffing and resource requirements. USCIS based 
its fee review largely on existing data that do not presume the outcome 
of these initiatives. USCIS cannot assume significant efficiency gains 
in this rule, in advance of such efficiency gains being measurably 
realized. Establishing more limited fees to account for estimated 
future efficiency could result in a deficient funding, and USCIS would 
not be able to meet its operational requirements. In contrast, if USCIS 
ultimately receives the resources identified in this proposed rule and 
subsequently achieves significant efficiency gains, this could result 
in backlog reductions and shorter processing times. Those efficiency 
improvements would then be considered in future fee reviews.
    As explained in the FY 2022/2023 Cost Projections section of this 
preamble, projected workloads for FY 2022 and FY 2023 exceed current 
processing capacity. Therefore, USCIS requires additional resources and 
staff to increase its processing capacity to match projected receipt 
volumes and ensure that backlogs do not continue to grow. Through the 
adjustments to the fee schedule proposed in this rule, USCIS expects to 
collect sufficient fee revenue to fund additional staff who will 
support the estimated FY 2022/2023 processing capacity requirements. 
While USCIS is committed to reducing processing times and the current 
backlog, DHS will not compromise the integrity of the immigration 
system and safeguarding national security.

VI. Fee Waivers

A. Background

    The fee-setting authority in INA sec. 286(m), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m), 
states that ``[f]ees for providing adjudication and naturalization 
services may be set 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

[[Page 456]]

applicants or other immigrants. Such fees may also be set at a level 
that will recover any additional costs associated with the 
administration of the fees collected.'' 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. 
DHS has long understood this provision to authorize DHS to 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 providing that a fee may be 
waived for eligible filers upon request, by codifying ``no fee,'' 
setting a $0 fee, or simply leaving the fee regulations silent and not 
codifying a fee for a particular service that it provides.
    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) (Oct. 1, 2020). 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 they 
are entitled to or deserving of the benefit requested and the reasons 
for their inability to pay and include evidence to support the reasons 
indicated. See 8 CFR 103.7(c)(2) (Oct. 1, 2020). There is no appeal of 
the denial of a fee waiver request. See id. However, Form I-912 may be 
resubmitted with additional evidence if the fee waiver request is 
denied.
    Following the 2010 fee rule, USCIS also issued guidance to the 
field to streamline fee waiver adjudications and make them more 
consistent among offices and form types nationwide. See Policy 
Memorandum, PM-602-0011.1,\100\ 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 Waiver Policy''). This guidance clarifies what measures of 
income can be used and the types of documentation that are acceptable 
for individuals to present as demonstration that they are unable to pay 
a fee when requesting a fee waiver. In June 2011, USCIS issued the 
Request for Fee Waiver, Form I-912, which is an optional standardized 
form with instructions that can be used to request a fee waiver in 
accordance with the fee waiver guidance.\101\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \100\ USCIS, PM 602.0011.1 (March 13, 2011) available at https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/memos/FeeWaiverGuidelines_Established_by_the_Final%20Rule_USCISFeeSchedule.pdf.
    \101\ The form and its instructions may be viewed at http://www.uscis.gov/i-912.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS has always implemented fee waivers for USCIS applicants based 
on need, and since 2007, has rejected the filing of fee waivers by 
individuals that have the financial means to pay required fees for the 
status or benefit sought. See 72 FR 4912 (Feb. 1, 2007). The William 
Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 
(TVPRA) \102\ requires DHS to permit certain categories of applicants 
to apply for fee waivers for ``any fees associated with filing an 
application for relief through final adjudication of the adjustment of 
status.'' \103\ DHS interprets ``any fees associated with filing an 
application for relief through final adjudication of the adjustment of 
status'' \104\ to mean that, in addition to the main immigration 
benefit request (such as Form I-360, Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), 
or Special Immigrant, Form I-914, Application for T Nonimmigrant 
Status, or Form I-918, Petition for U Nonimmigrant Status), these 
categories of 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.\105\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \102\ 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).
    \103\ See id.
    \104\ See id.
    \105\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. The 2020 Fee Rule Waiver Changes

    As stated in section IV of this preamble, each fee review plans for 
a certain level of fee waivers, fee exemptions, and other fee-paying 
policy decisions. DHS sets IEFA fees to recover estimated full cost, 
including the estimated cost of fee-waived and fee-exempt work. 
Applicants, petitioners, and requestors who pay a fee cover the cost of 
processing their own requests plus the costs of requests that are fee 
exempt, fee waived, or fee reduced. In prior years, USCIS fees have 
given significant weight to the ability-to-pay principle. However, on 
October 25, 2019, DHS revised USCIS fee waiver policies and Form 1-912, 
including by requiring fee waiver applicants to use the revised Form I-
912, requiring waiver applicants to submit tax transcripts to 
demonstrate income, and not accepting evidence of receipt of a means-
tested public benefit as evidence of inability to pay as described 
(``the 2019 Fee Waiver Revisions''). See USCIS Policy Manual Alert, Fee 
Submission of Benefit Requests, PA 2019-06 (October 25, 2019).\106\ 
This guidance was effective December 2, 2019. Form I-912 was updated 
and submitted for a 30-day comment period on June 5, 2019,\107\ and 
subsequently approved by OMB on October 24, 2019.\108\ While the 2019 
Fee Waiver Revisions took effect on December 2, 2019, the United States 
District Court for the Northern District of California preliminarily 
enjoined them in City of Seattle, No. 3:19-CV-07151-MMC, on December 
11, 2019. USCIS then reverted to using the previous policy and form.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \106\ Available at https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/policy-manual-updates/20191025-FeeWaivers.pdf.
    \107\ See 84 FR 26137 (June 5, 2019).
    \108\ See OMB Notice of Action available at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=201910-1615-006#.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subsequently, in the FY 2019/2020 fee review, DHS limited fee 
waivers in the 2020 fee rule to immigration benefit requests for which 
USCIS is required by law to consider a fee waiver or where the USCIS 
Director exercised favorable discretion. 8 CFR 106.3(a)(1) (Oct. 2, 
2020). The 2020 fee rule also limited fee waivers to individuals who 
have an annual household income of less than 125 percent of the Federal 
Poverty Guidelines (FPG) as defined by the U.S. Department of Health 
and Human Services (HHS). 8 CFR 106.3(c) (Oct. 2, 2020). In addition, 
the USCIS Director's discretion to grant a waiver was limited to: (1) 
an individual who had an annual household income at or below 125 
percent of the FPG as defined by HHS; (2) was seeking an immigration 
benefit for which they were not required to submit an affidavit of 
support under INA sec. 213A, 8 U.S.C. 1183a, or were not already a 
sponsored immigrant as defined in 8 CFR 213a.1; and (3) was seeking an 
immigration benefit for which they were not subject to the public 
charge inadmissibility ground under INA sec. 212(a)(4), 8 U.S.C. 
1182(a)(4). 8 CFR 106.3(b) (Oct. 2, 2020). The 2020 fee rule required 
that a person must submit a request for a fee waiver on the form 
prescribed by USCIS. 8 CFR 106.3(d) (Oct. 2, 2020). Finally, the 2020 
fee rule prescribed the acceptable documentation of gross household 
income that a person submitting a request for a fee waiver must submit. 
8 CFR 106.3(f) (Oct. 2, 2020). As noted above, the 2020 fee rule was 
preliminarily enjoined before its effective date.
    As stated in Section IV, DHS has determined that the 2020 fee 
rule's changes to fee waiver and fee exemption requirements would 
adversely impact

[[Page 457]]

the ability of those who may be less able to afford the proposed fees 
to seek an immigration benefit for which they may be eligible. 
Therefore, in this rule, DHS is proposing to maintain previous 
regulations for fee waivers and add fee exemptions to address 
accessibility and affordability. DHS acknowledges that shifting away 
from the beneficiary-pays approach taken in the 2020 fee rule and 
reverting to the agency's historical practice of emphasizing the 
ability-to-pay principle allocates costs away from individuals who are 
exempt from paying fees or have their fees waived, and results in some 
fees being higher than the estimated cost of providing the associated 
service. Nevertheless, DHS has determined that these proposed fee 
waiver regulations are reasonable, authorized by statute, and 
consistent with the policy goal of making immigration benefits 
affordable to the public while providing USCIS with adequate funding 
for its services.

C. Inability To Pay

    DHS does not propose to change fee waiver eligibility based on an 
inability to pay, and will maintain the 2011 Fee Waiver Policy criteria 
that established a streamlined process where USCIS could waive the 
entire fee and the biometric services fee (if applicable) for forms 
listed in the 8 CFR 103.7(c)(3) (Oct. 1, 2020).\109\ Applicants would 
still be eligible for fee waivers if the form is listed in proposed 8 
CFR 106.3(a)(3) and the applicant demonstrates that they meet at least 
one of the following criteria:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \109\ See U.S. Citizenship and Immigr. Servs., U.S. Dep't of 
Homeland Security, 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), https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/memos/FeeWaiverGuidelines_Established_by_the_Final%20Rule_USCISFeeSchedule.pdf; AFM Chapter 10.9(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Is receiving a means-tested benefit;
     Had a household income at or below 150 percent of the FPG; 
or
     Is experiencing extreme financial hardship, such as 
unexpected medical bills or emergencies.
    The FPG, as annually published by the U.S. Department of Health and 
Human Services \110\ increases the latest updated Census Bureau poverty 
thresholds by the relevant percentage change in the Consumer Price 
Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U). Census Bureau income thresholds 
vary by family size and composition. If a family's total income is less 
than the family's threshold, then every individual in that family is 
considered to be living in poverty. The official poverty definition 
uses money income before taxes and does not include capital gains or 
noncash benefits (public benefits).\111\ The 2020 Poverty Guidelines 
for the 48 Contiguous States and the District of Columbia was $12,760 
for a household of one and $26,200 for a household of four.\112\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \110\ See Annual Update of the HHS Poverty Guidelines (87 FR 
3315, Jan 21, 2022), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/01/21/2022-01166/annual-update-of-the-hhs-poverty-guidelines.
    \111\ See How the Census Bureau Measures Poverty, available at 
https://www.census.gov/topics/income-poverty/poverty/guidance/
poverty-
measures.html#:~:text=Poverty%20Thresholds%3A%20Measure%20of%20Need,a
nd%20age%20of%20the%20members (last visited April 19, 2022).
    \112\ See Annual Update of the HHS Poverty Guidelines (86 FR 
3060, Jan 17, 2020), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/01/17/2020-00858/annual-update-of-the-hhs-poverty-guidelines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS considered the use of other measures of ability to pay for 
administration of its fee waiver policies based on input provided by 
stakeholders and due to concerns about the continued upward trend in 
the number and dollar amounts of fee waivers approved since the three-
step eligibility process and Form I-912 were introduced. For example, 
besides the FPG and increasing the percentage reviewed, DHS looked at 
using the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development 
(HUD) Median Family Income (MFI) \113\ estimates. The median household 
income for 2020 was $67,521 in the United States.\114\ HUD Income 
Limits calculations include the median family incomes for each area. 
HUD uses the Section 8 (housing choice voucher) program's Fair Market 
Rent (FMR) \115\ area definitions in developing median family 
incomes.\116\ After careful consideration, DHS proposes to maintain the 
use of the FPG for determining income thresholds for USCIS fee waiver 
purposes for several reasons. First, the FPG ensures a consistent 
national standard for income thresholds as HHS is required to update 
the FPG at least annually, adjusting them based on the Consumer Price 
Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U). The MFI and other thresholds 
vary greatly by area and require a specific calculation by state and 
county and, accordingly, relying on them would increase administrative 
costs. Second, it promotes consistency between fee waivers and numerous 
other Federal programs that utilize the FPG as an eligibility 
criterion, including Medicaid. The MFI is specifically used for HUD 
benefits and the calculation changes based on the area, so additional 
calculations would need to be done in order to determine eligibility. 
Thirdly, USCIS has used the FPG since putting the streamlined fee 
waiver request and approval process in place over a decade ago, has 
been effectively used, and its continued use would limit 
confusion.\117\ In addition, DHS believes that the using FPG minimizes 
confusion for the public and USCIS employees in determining income 
thresholds for fee waiver eligibility. DHS has determined that use of 
the FPG for determining income thresholds affords consistency for 
administering a nationwide benefits program that other income 
guidelines do not, preserves the accessibility and affordability of 
immigration benefits for those who are eligible and may be less able to 
afford the proposed fees, and does not result in unmanageable levels of 
unfunded immigration services that must be borne by other fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \113\ See HHS, Office Of Policy Development And Research (Pd&R), 
Income Limits, available at https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il.html (last visited 10/26/2021). USCIS fee waiver eligibility for 
receipt of a means-tested benefit includes through HUD-related 
housing public benefits.
    \114\ See U.S. Census Bureau, Income and Poverty in the United 
States: 2020 (September 14, 2021) available at https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2021/demo/p60-273.html (last 
visited 04/19/2022).
    \115\ See 24 CFR 888.113 are estimates of 40th percentile gross 
rents for standard quality units within a metropolitan area or 
nonmetropolitan county. See Fair Market Rents (40th Percentile 
Rents) available at https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/fmr.html 
(last visited 4/19/2022).
    \116\ See Methodology for Determining Section 8 Income Limits 
available at https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il//il21/IncomeLimitsMethodology-FY21.pdf (last visited 4/19/2022).
    \117\ As noted in the FY 2016/2017 fee rule, estimates of 
foregone revenue from fee waivers and exemptions 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 73307. Since 2017, the upward 
trend in the amount of fee revenue foregone has since subsided. See 
Appendix V--Fee Waivers of the supporting documentation in this 
docket for historical trends from FY 2014 to FY 2020; the graph 
excludes the cost of fee exemptions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. USCIS Director's Discretionary Fee Waivers and Exemptions

    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 
the 8 CFR 103.7(c) (Oct. 1, 2020). See 75 FR 58990 (Sept. 24, 2010); 8 
CFR 103.7(d) (Oct. 1, 2020). DHS proposes to retain the authority in 
regulations for the Director of USCIS to provide exemptions from or 
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. See 8 CFR 103.7(d)

[[Page 458]]

(Oct. 1, 2021); proposed 8 CFR 106.3(c). Previous USCIS Directors have 
used this authority to permit fee waivers or provide fee exemptions for 
specific categories and groups of immigrants.\118\ DHS further proposes 
to maintain the current provision's limitation on the delegation of 
this authority to waive or exempt fees to the Deputy Director. Id. In 
the 2020 fee rule, DHS had proposed to limit the USCIS' Director's 
authority to issue fee waivers and exemptions based on categories of 
applicants such as asylee, refugees, national security or emergencies 
or natural disasters. See 8 CFR 106.3(b) and (e).\119\ DHS believes 
that maintaining the authority for this extraordinary relief with the 
leaders of USCIS will ensure that it is consistently administered and 
not handled in a way that could impair USCIS fee revenue or shift 
significant costs among benefit requests by policy outside of 
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \118\ For example, See, DHS Announces Fee Exemptions, 
Streamlined Processing for Afghan Nationals as They Resettle in the 
U.S. (Nov. 8, 2021), available at https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/news-releases/dhs-announces-fee-exemptions-streamlined-processing-for-afghan-nationals-as-they-resettle-in-the-us (last visited 04/19/
2022). An individual is not permitted to independently submit a 
request to the USCIS Director to exempt or waive a fee.
    \119\ See 85 FR 46920 (Aug 3, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Requirement To Submit Fee Waiver Form

    In addition, DHS proposes that fee waiver requests must be 
submitted on the form prescribed by USCIS, Form I-912, Request for Fee 
Waiver. Proposed 8 CFR 106.3(a)(2). Currently, requests for fee waivers 
may be made via a written request submitted with evidence of 
eligibility. Less than one percent of the fee waivers requests are 
submitted through a written request instead of Form I-912.\120\ Some 
written fee waiver requests may be denied because they do not provide 
sufficient information for USCIS to adjudicate the request. DHS 
believes that requiring Form I-912 will ensure that the information 
required to make a fee waiver determination is provided and may result 
in fewer rejections due to insufficient or incomplete requests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \120\ See the Regulatory Impact Analysis, sec. O, Fee Waivers, 
for further discussion. A total of 29 letters were submitted in lieu 
of Form I-912 in 2017, .07 percent of the total.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS realizes that requiring the form instead of allowing a written 
statement with documentation may be an additional burden. Adjudicating 
ad hoc fee waiver requests, however, has proven to be difficult for 
USCIS due to the varied quality and information provided in such 
standalone letter requests. Form I-912 has an estimated time of 
completion of one hour and ten minutes, and it provides standardization 
that will assist USCIS in review of requests. Because DHS has 
determined that requiring the form will reduce rejections, DHS believes 
that any added burden is warranted and in the long term will assist 
applicants and limit future burdens.

F. Form and Policy Changes

    As discussed in the Paperwork Reduction Act section of this rule, 
DHS is proposing changes to the information collection requirements 
\121\ associated with Form I-912 to clarify the following policies:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \121\ DHS is proposing these policy changes in guidance and in 
in form instructions and not codifying them in this rule as 
regulations but marks those changes in the supporting documents in 
the docket for the public to review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The burden of proof for inability to pay is based on a 
preponderance of the evidence. An officer may grant a request for fee 
waiver in the absence of some of this documentation so long as the 
available documentation supports that the requestor is more likely than 
not to be unable to pay the fee.
     A child's receipt of public housing assistance, such as 
public housing or Section 8, will be acceptable as required evidence of 
the parent's eligibility for a fee waiver when the parent resides in 
the same residence.
     The documentary requirements for humanitarian categories 
of fee waiver requestors will include that:
    [cir] Requestors seeking a fee waiver for any immigration benefit 
associated with or based on a pending or approved petition or 
application for VAWA benefits or T or U nonimmigrant status do not need 
to list the following people as household members or provide income 
information for:
    [ssquf] Any person in the household who is or was the requestor's 
abuser, human trafficker, or perpetrator; or
    [ssquf] A person who is or was a member of the abuser, human 
trafficker, or perpetrator's household.
    [cir] Financial hardships that qualify an applicant for a fee 
waiver may result from, but are not limited to the following examples:
    [ssquf] A medical emergency or catastrophic illness affecting the 
noncitizen or the noncitizen's dependents;
    [ssquf] Unemployment;
    [ssquf] Significant loss of work hours and wages (change in 
employment status);
    [ssquf] Eviction;
    [ssquf] Homelessness;
    [ssquf] Military deployment of spouse or parent;
    [ssquf] Natural disaster;
    [ssquf] Loss of home (destruction such as fire, water, or 
collapse);
    [ssquf] Inability to pay basic utilities and rent or mortgage 
(payments and bills for each month are more than the monthly wages);
    [ssquf] Substantial financial losses to a small business that 
affect personal income;
    [ssquf] Victimization;
    [ssquf] Divorce or death of a spouse that affects overall income; 
or
    [ssquf] Situations that could not normally be expected in the 
regular course of life events.
    [cir] A requestor may submit tax returns, a W-2, or pay stubs to 
establish household income.
    [cir] If the requestor has no income due to unemployment, 
homelessness, or other factors, the requestor may provide, as 
applicable:
    [ssquf] A detailed description of the financial situation that 
demonstrates eligibility for the fee waiver;
    [ssquf] Hospital bills, or bankruptcy documents;
    [ssquf] If the requestor is receiving support services, an 
affidavit from a religious institution, non-profit, hospital, or 
community-based organization verifying the person is currently 
receiving some benefit or support from that entity and attesting to the 
requestor's financial situation; or
    [ssquf] Evidence of unemployment, such as a termination letter or 
unemployment insurance receipt.
    These proposed policy changes are aimed at reducing the public 
burden and clarifying the types of documents and applicant can provide 
with the form. These changes are also responsive to the comments and 
suggestions provided by the public in the RPI. DHS believes that making 
these policy changes will provide additional guidance to the public on 
eligibility and will clarify requirements for vulnerable populations.

G. Request for Comments

    DHS welcomes comment on the proposed changes to additional fee 
waivers which may include additional categories of petitioners, 
applicants or forms.
    In addition, while DHS proposes no changes to the fee waiver 
criteria, the Department specifically requests comments on the 
appropriate level of income that should be used by an applicant who is 
unable to pay their fee and data to support that suggested level or 
measure.
    DHS also welcomes comments on requiring Form I-912 for all fee 
requests and on alternatives for reducing

[[Page 459]]

rejections based on lack of information or documentation with a written 
request.

VII. Fee Exemptions

    As stated in section VI.A., DHS may provide services for free and 
fund those free services with the fees charged to other, unrelated 
filings. DHS has exercised its discretion to provide free services by 
providing that a fee may be waived upon request, or by codifying ``no 
fee,'' setting a $0 fee, or not codifying a fee for a particular 
service that USCIS administers. DHS is proposing to maintain fee 
exemptions currently being applied and provide new fee exemptions in 
this rule as follows.

A. Codification of Benefit Requests With No Fees and Exemptions of 
Certain Categories or Classifications From Fees

    DHS proposes to codify several longstanding fee exemptions that are 
currently provided through policy guidance documents, such as form 
instructions, the USCIS policy manual, or similar directives, but not 
in regulations, including the following: \122\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \122\ Application for Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 
Islands (CNMI) Long-Term Resident Status (Form I-955) is not 
included in this list because USCIS only accepted applications for 
initial CNMI long-term resident status between February 19, 2020 and 
August 17, 2020. As of August 17, 2020, USCIS no longer accepts any 
Forms I-955.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Form I-90, Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card. 
No fee if the applicant was issued a card but never received it, or if 
the applicant's card was issued with incorrect information because of 
DHS error. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(1)(iv).
     Form I-102, Application for Replacement/Initial 
Nonimmigrant Arrival-Departure Document. No fee for initial filings for 
a nonimmigrant member of the U.S. armed forces, for a nonimmigrant 
member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) armed forces or 
civil component; for a nonimmigrant member of the Partnership for Peace 
military program under the Status of Forces Agreement; and for 
replacement for DHS error. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(2)(i) through (iv).
     Form I-129CWR, Semiannual Report for CW-1 Employers. 
Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(4)(ii).
     Form I-131, Application for Travel Document. Proposed 8 
CFR 106.2(a)(7)(v). No fees for parole requests from current or former 
U.S. armed forces service members.
     Form I-134, Declaration of Financial Support. Proposed 8 
CFR 106.2(a)(9).
     Form I-360, Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special 
Immigrant. DHS proposes no fee for the following:
    [cir] A petition for Special Immigrant Juvenile (SIJ) 
classification, Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(16)(iii); and
    [cir] A petition for a person who served honorably on active duty 
in the U.S. armed forces filing under INA sec. 101(a)(27)(K). Proposed 
8 CFR 106.2(a)(16)(v).
     Form I-361, Affidavit of Financial Support and Intent to 
Petition for Legal Custody for Public Law 97-359 Amerasian. Proposed 8 
CFR 106.2(a)(17).
     Form I-363, Request to Enforce Affidavit of Financial 
Support and Intent to Petition for Legal Custody for Public Law 97-359 
Amerasian. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(18).
     Form I-407, Record of Abandonment of Lawful Permanent 
Resident Status. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(19).
     Form I-485J, Confirmation of Bona Fide Job Offer or 
Request for Job Portability Under INA Section 204(j). Proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(22).
     Form I-508, Request for Waiver of Certain Rights, 
Privileges, Exemptions, and Immunities. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(23).
     Form I-539, Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant 
Status for nonimmigrant A, G, and NATO and T nonimmigrant. Proposed 8 
CFR 106.2(a)(25)(iii)(A).
     Form I-566, Interagency Record of Request--A, G, or NATO 
Dependent Employment Authorization or Change/Adjustment To/From A, G, 
or NATO Status. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(26).
     Form I-589, Application for Asylum and for Withholding of 
Removal. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(27).
     Form I-590, Registration for Classification as a Refugee. 
Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(28).
     Form I-600, Petition to Classify Orphan as an Immediate 
Relative. DHS proposes no fee for the first Form I-600 filed for a 
child based on an approved Form I-600A, Application for Advance 
Processing of an Orphan Petition, during the Form I-600A approval or 
extended approval period. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(29)(i).
     Form I-601, Application for Waiver of Grounds of 
Inadmissibility. DHS proposes to move the current fee exemption for 
concurrently filing a Form I-601 for certain reasons in 8 CFR 245.1(f) 
to the fee provision for the Form I-601. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(32).
     Form I-602, Application by Refugee for Waiver of Grounds 
of Inadmissibility. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(34).
     Form I-693, Report of Medical Examination and Vaccination 
Record. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(38).
     Form I-730, Refugee/Asylee Relative Petition. Proposed 8 
CFR 106.2(a)(41).
     Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization. DHS 
proposes that no fee will be charged for an initial EAD for the 
following:
    [cir] Dependents of certain Government and international 
organizations or NATO personnel. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(43)(iii)(B).
    [cir] N-8 (Parent of noncitizen classified as SK3) and N-9 (Child 
of N-8) nonimmigrants; Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(43)(iii)(C).
    [cir] Persons granted asylee status (AS1, AS6). Proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(43)(iii)(D).
    [cir] Citizens of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, or Palau. Proposed 
8 CFR 106.2(a)(43)(iii)(E).
    [cir] Persons Granted Withholding of Deportation or Removal. 
Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(43)(iii)(F).
    [cir] Applicants for Asylum and Withholding of Deportation or 
Removal including derivatives. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(43)(iii)(G).
    [cir] Taiwanese dependents of Taipei Economic and Cultural 
Representative Office E-1 employees. Proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(43)(iii)(H).
    [cir] A Request for replacement EAD based on USCIS error. Proposed 
8 CFR 106.2(a)(43)(iv).
    [cir] For a renewal or replacement EAD for the following:
    [ssquf] Dependents of certain foreign government, international 
organization, or NATO personnel. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(43)(v)(B);
    [ssquf] Citizens of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, or Palau. 
Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(43)(v)(C); and
    [ssquf] Persons Granted Withholding of Deportation or Removal. 
Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(43)(v)(D).
     Form I-765V, Application for Employment Authorization for 
Abused Nonimmigrant Spouse. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(43)(vi) and 8 CFR 
106.3(a)(3)(iii).
     Form I-800, Petition to Classify Convention Adoptee as an 
Immediate Relative, for the first Form I-800 filed for a child based on 
an approved Form I-800A, Application for Determination of Suitability 
to Adopt a Child from a Convention Country, during the Form I-800A 
approval period or extended approval period. Proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(44)(i)(A).
     Form I-821, Application for Temporary Protected Status. 
There is no fee for re-registration. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(48)(ii).

[[Page 460]]

     Form I-854, Inter-Agency Alien Witness and Informant 
Record. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(52).
     Form I-864, Affidavit of Support Under Section 213A of the 
INA. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(53).
     Form I-864A, Contract Between Sponsor and Household 
Member. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(53)(i).
     Form I-864EZ, Affidavit of Support Under Section 213A of 
the INA. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(53)(ii).
     Form I-864W, Request for Exemption for Intending 
Immigrant's Affidavit of Support. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(53)(iii).
     Form I-865, Sponsor's Notice of Change of Address. 
Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(53)(iv).
     Form I-912, Request for Fee Waiver. Proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(58).
     Supplement A to Form I-914, Application for Immigrant 
Family Member of a T-1 Recipient, and Supplement B to Form I-914, 
Declaration of Law Enforcement Officer for Victim of Trafficking in 
Persons. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(59).
     Supplement A to Form I-918, Petition for Qualifying Family 
Member of U-1 Recipient, and Supplement B to Form I-918, U Nonimmigrant 
Status Certification. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(60).
     Form I-942, Request for Reduced Fee, requesting a reduced 
fee for the naturalization application Form N-400. Proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(65).
     Form N-4, Monthly Report on Naturalization Papers. 
Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(b)(1).
     Form N-476, Request for Certification of Military or Naval 
Service. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(b)(5).
     Form N-644, Application for Posthumous Citizenship. 
Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(b)(10).
     Form N-648, Medical Certification for Disability 
Exceptions. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(b)(11).
     Claimant under INA sec. 289. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(c)(9).

B. Proposed Fee Exemptions

    The TVPRA \123\ requires DHS to permit certain categories of 
requestors filing petitions and applications to apply for fee waivers, 
including for ``any fees associated with filing an application for 
relief through final adjudication of the adjustment of status.'' \124\ 
This provision generally is limited to VAWA self-petitioners, as 
defined in INA sec. 101(a)(51), and noncitizens applying for certain 
other immigration benefits available to battered spouses and children 
or for T or U nonimmigrant status. DHS interprets this language to mean 
that, in addition to the main benefit request, individuals must have 
the opportunity to request a fee waiver for any form associated with 
the main benefit request up to and including the adjustment of status 
application. See 8 CFR 103.7(c)(3)(xviii) (Oct. 1, 2020); proposed 8 
CFR 106.3(a)(3)(iii). Although DHS is authorized to establish and 
collect a fee for that benefit request under INA sec. 286(m), 8 U.S.C. 
1356(m), several humanitarian benefit requests have been exempted from 
fees because of the humanitarian nature of these programs and the 
likelihood that individuals who file requests in these categories will 
qualify for a fee waiver if they request it.\125\ DHS is proposing to 
provide additional fee exemptions for the following humanitarian-based 
immigration benefit requests under proposed 8 CFR 106.3(b) for the 
reasons listed below. These fee exemptions do not impact eligibility 
for any particular form or when an individual may file the form. These 
fee exemptions are in addition to the forms listed under proposed 8 CFR 
106.2 for which DHS proposes to codify that there is ``no fee.'' Table 
13C below provides a summary of the categories and the forms eligible 
for fee exemptions and fee waivers. In this proposed rule, DHS 
estimates that the increase in fee exemptions accounts for 1 percent of 
the 40-percent weighted average fee increase.\126\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \123\ 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).
    \124\ See INA sec. 245(l)(7), 8 U.S.C. 1255(l)(7).
    \125\ See, e.g., previous 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(UU) and (VV) 
(codifying no fee for, respectively, the Application for T 
Nonimmigrant Status, Form I-914, and the Petition for U Nonimmigrant 
Status, Form I-918).
    \126\ Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO), September 
13, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Victims of Severe Form of Trafficking (T Nonimmigrants)
    There is no fee for filing Form I-914, Application for T 
Nonimmigrant Status; Form I-914, Supplement A, Application for Family 
Member of T-1 Recipient; and Form I-914, Supplement B, Declaration of 
Law Enforcement Officer for Victim of Trafficking in Persons; under 
former 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(UU) (Oct. 1, 2020), and DHS will continue 
to have no filing fee for these forms under proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(59). Principal applicants for T nonimmigrant status currently 
also do not file Form I-765 or pay a fee when an EAD is requested on 
Form I-914 and is issued incident to status. Any principal applicant 
who does not request employment authorization on Form I-914 must file 
Form I-765 but is fee exempt. Derivative beneficiaries must file Form 
I-765 and must submit a fee or fee waiver request. Currently, T 
nonimmigrants may request fee waivers for all forms up to and including 
a Form I-485 and associated forms.\127\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \127\ See INA sec. 245(l)(7), 8 U.S.C. 1255(l)(7); 8 CFR 
103.7(c) (Oct. 1, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this proposed rule, DHS is proposing to expand fee exemptions 
for all persons seeking or granted T nonimmigrant status, including 
principals and derivatives, for all forms associated with an initial 
application for T nonimmigrant status through final adjudication of the 
T nonimmigrant's application for adjustment of status to LPR. See 
proposed 8 CFR 106.3(b)(2). Applicants for T nonimmigrant status are a 
small and especially vulnerable population that has historically 
underused the T visa program; DHS has never come close to reaching the 
annual statutory cap of 5,000 visas allocated to principal victims 
since the creation of the T visa program. Many T visa applicants are 
also eligible for fee waivers. To encourage eligible victims of 
trafficking to use the T visa program, DHS is proposing to expand fee 
exemptions for this population.
2. Victims of Qualifying Criminal Activity (U Nonimmigrants)
    There is no fee for filing Form I-918, Petition for U Nonimmigrant 
Status; Form I-918, Supplement A, Petition for Qualifying Family Member 
of U-1 Recipient; or Form I-918, Supplement B U Nonimmigrant Status 
Certification. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(VV) (Oct. 1, 2020). DHS 
proposes to continue having no fee for these forms. Proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(60). Principal U nonimmigrants who are in the United States 
are also currently fee exempt for fees associated with employment 
authorization when it is issued incident to status and are not required 
to file Form I-765 to receive an EAD under 8 CFR 214.14(c)(7). 
Principal U nonimmigrants outside the United States are fee exempt for 
fees associated with employment authorization issued incident to status 
once they enter the United States and file Form I-765. Derivative 
beneficiaries requesting employment authorization, however, must file 
Form I-765 with the appropriate fee or fee waiver request. U 
nonimmigrants may also request a fee waiver for any forms filed up to 
and including a Form I-485 and associated forms.\128\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \128\ See INA sec. 245(l)(7), 8 U.S.C. 1255(l)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS is now proposing to expand fee exemptions for persons seeking 
or granted U nonimmigrant status for all

[[Page 461]]

forms filed before filing a Form I-485. Proposed 8 CFR 106.3(b)(5). 
Form I-765 would only be fee exempt, however, for an initial request 
under 8 CFR 274a.12(a)(19) and (20) and an initial request under 8 CFR 
274a.12(c)(14).
    DHS is proposing that any form associated with U nonimmigrant 
status be fee exempt up until the filing of a Form I-485. A fee would 
be due (or a fee waiver requested) for a U nonimmigrant to file a Form 
I-485 and any Form I-929, Petition for Qualifying Family Member. The 
fee exemption for U nonimmigrants would not extend to the Form I-485, 
unlike the fee exemption proposed for a Form I-485 filed by T 
nonimmigrants. DHS acknowledges that, like T nonimmigrants, U 
nonimmigrants are a particularly vulnerable population as victims of 
crimes and may have similar financial resources or employment 
prospects. However, DHS is proposing to treat them differently with 
regard to their respective Form I-485 fees. U nonimmigrants may have a 
longer time with work authorization than T nonimmigrants given the 
ability of U nonimmigrant petitioners to receive work authorization as 
part of the bona fide determination (BFD) process or with placement on 
the waiting list and the lengthy waiting period before a U visa becomes 
available. While some T nonimmigrant applicants may have work 
authorization during the pendency of their application pursuant to a 
grant of Continued Presence by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement 
(ICE), there has not been a BFD process implemented in the T visa 
program, nor has a waiting list ever been used. The annual cap of 5,000 
visas for the T visa program has also never been met, whereas the 
annual cap of 10,000 visas for the U visa program is consistently 
reached. Given current T nonimmigrant status processing times, which 
are much shorter than in the U visa context, the issuance of T 
nonimmigrant status may occur before a U petitioner is issued a BFD or 
waiting list-based work authorization. Some T nonimmigrants are also 
able to adjust much more quickly than a U visa petitioner given their 
ability to adjust upon the completion of the trafficking investigation 
or prosecution if certified by the U.S. Attorney General. In some 
cases, the investigation or prosecution is already complete at the time 
the individual receives T nonimmigrant status, rendering them 
immediately eligible to adjust status. For all of these reasons, U 
nonimmigrants are likely to have had work authorization much longer 
than T nonimmigrants, and thus are less likely to need a fee exemption 
for filing Form I-485.
    In addition, USCIS receives a large number of petitions for U 
nonimmigrant status each year and the cost of administering the U 
nonimmigrant program is already largely funded by other fee-paying 
requests. The T nonimmigrant program is also funded by other fee-paying 
requests, but the costs of the T program are much lower because the 
volume of T-based requests that USCIS must adjudicate is significantly 
lower. DHS has determined that extending fee exemptions to the low 
volume of T nonimmigrants filing Form I-485 could be absorbed with very 
little impact. In contrast, providing a fee exemption for U 
nonimmigrants filing Form I-485 would result in substantial 
adjudication costs being shifted to fee payers because of the much 
larger number of U nonimmigrants who file Form I-485. Thus, while the 
populations have many similar characteristics, because of the different 
levels of cost shifting required, DHS decided that the different 
treatments for the Form I-485 fee were justified as proposed in this 
rule.
3. VAWA Form I-360 Self-Petitioners and Derivatives
    Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) self-petitioners currently pay no 
fee for filing Form I-360 and would continue to not pay a fee under 
this proposed rule. See 8 CFR 106.2(a)(16)(ii) (Oct. 1, 2020); proposed 
8 CFR 106.3(b)(6). VAWA self-petitioners also currently are not 
required to file Form I-765 or pay a fee when employment authorization 
is requested on Form I-360. VAWA self-petitioners who do not request 
employment authorization on Form I-360, however, and all derivative 
beneficiaries must file Form I-765 and submit the fee or request a fee 
waiver to obtain employment authorization. VAWA self-petitioners and 
derivatives are currently eligible for fee waivers for any forms filed 
up to and including a Form I-485 and associated forms.\129\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \129\ See INA sec. 245(l)(7), 8 U.S.C. 1255(l)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS is now proposing to expand fee exemptions for persons seeking 
or granted immigrant classification as VAWA self-petitioners. See 
proposed 8 CFR 106.3(b)(6). VAWA self-petitioners and derivatives are 
eligible to concurrently file Form I-360 and Form I-485 if a visa would 
be immediately available after approval of Form I-360.\130\ Therefore, 
when a VAWA Form I-360 is concurrently filed or pending with Form I-
485, DHS proposes that VAWA self-petitioners be fee exempt for all 
forms associated with the Form I-360 filing through final adjudication 
of the adjustment of status application, including the filing of Form 
I-290B. Id. When a VAWA Form I-360 is filed as a standalone self-
petition, however, the VAWA self-petitioner would only be fee exempt 
for Form I-290B, if filed as a motion to reopen or reconsider or an 
appeal of the Form I-360 denial. Proposed 8 CFR 106.3(b)(6)(ii). All 
separately filed Form I-485s and associated forms would require a fee 
or fee waiver request. Additionally, only initial requests for 
employment authorization under 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(14) and initial 
requests under INA sec. 204(a)(1)(K) for the beneficiary of an approved 
VAWA self-petition would be fee exempt. Requests for employment 
authorization approved under INA sec. 204(a)(1)(K) are issued as a 
category (c)(31) EAD. A fee or fee waiver request will be required to 
replace or renew the initial, free EAD. For VAWA self-petitioners 
filing Form I-360, all fee exemptions will also apply to derivative 
beneficiaries. Proposed 8 CFR 106.3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \130\ See INA sec. 204(a)(1)(A)(iii)(II)(cc), (iv), (v), and 
(vii); 8 U.S.C. 1154(a)(1)(A)(iii)(II)(cc), (iv), (v), and (vii). 
See 8 CFR 245.2(a)(i)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Like T and U nonimmigrants, VAWA self-petitioners are a 
particularly vulnerable population as victims of abuse and may not have 
the financial resources or employment authorization needed to pay for 
fees when initially filing for immigrant classification as VAWA self-
petitioners. When passing VAWA, Congress gave individuals the ability 
to independently seek immigrant classification without the abusive U.S. 
citizen or LPR's participation or knowledge. VAWA self-petitioners may 
still be living with their abuser or may have recently fled their 
abusive relationship when filing the self-petition. According to the 
National Network to End Domestic Violence, abusers often maintain 
control over financial resources to further the abuse, and victims may 
have to choose between staying in an abusive relationship and poverty 
and homelessness.\131\ Therefore, victims of abuse may not have access 
to their finances or the financial means to pay for fees when filing 
VAWA Form I-360, Form I-485, and associated forms. DHS, however, must 
weigh these difficult considerations against the number of VAWA self-
petition filings it receives each year and the transfer of costs to 
other petitions and applications if these

[[Page 462]]

filings were fee exempt through final adjudication of the adjustment of 
status application. Therefore, DHS is proposing to limit the new fee 
exemptions for these populations to forms associated with the VAWA 
self-petition filing that are filed at the same time as or while the 
VAWA Form I-360 self-petition is pending before the adjustment of 
status applicant is filed. DHS is not proposing to exempt VAWA self-
petitioners from the Form I-485 fee when it is filed after their I-360 
is approved because the approval of the Form I-360 authorizes 
employment of the self-petitioner and the ability to either obtain the 
funds to pay the fee or request a fee waiver.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \131\ See ``About Financial Abuse,'' Nat'l Network to End 
Domestic Violence, https://nnedv.org/content/about-financial-abuse/ 
(last viewed June 2, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Conditional Permanent Residents Filing a Waiver of Joint Filing 
Requirement Based on Battery or Extreme Cruelty
    Conditional permanent residents (CPRs) filing a waiver of the joint 
filing requirement based on battery or extreme cruelty (abuse waiver) 
are considered VAWA self-petitioners as defined in INA sec. 
101(a)(51)(C) and currently may request a fee waiver when filing Form 
I-751. See 8 CFR 103.7(c)(3)(vii) (Oct. 1, 2020). DHS proposes that a 
CPR requesting an abuse waiver continue to be eligible to request a fee 
waiver when filing Form I-751. See proposed 8 CFR 106.3(a)(3)(i)(C). 
Because CPRs filing Form I-751 may file for more than one basis when 
seeking any waiver of the joint filing requirement, USCIS is unable to 
provide a fee exemption for Form I-751 abuse waivers. However, because 
CPRs requesting abuse waivers are a relatively small population and are 
particularly vulnerable as victims of abuse as stated above, DHS is 
proposing to exempt them from the fee for Form I-290B to file a motion 
to reopen or reconsider the decision after a Form I-751 abuse waiver 
request is denied. See proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(15).
5. Abused Spouses and Children Adjusting Status Under CAA or HRIFA
    Abused spouses and children seeking benefits under the Cuban 
Adjustment Act (CAA) and the Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act 
(HRIFA) are considered VAWA self-petitioners as defined in INA sec. 
101(a)(51)(D) and (E). As such, they are currently eligible for fee 
waivers for any forms filed through adjustment of status to LPR, 
including associated forms.\132\ See 8 CFR 103.7(c)(3)(xviii) (Oct. 1, 
2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \132\ See INA sec. 245(l)(7); 8 U.S.C. 1255(l)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS proposes to provide fee exemptions for these persons for all 
forms filed through final adjudication for adjustment of status to LPR, 
including Form I-485 and associated forms. Proposed 8 CFR 106.3(b)(4). 
For abused spouses and children filing under CAA and HRIFA, they will 
be fee exempt for Form I-485 and associated forms, as they file for 
VAWA benefits on Form I-485. Proposed 8 CFR 106.3(b)(4). Associated 
forms include any forms filed before the individual adjusts their 
status to LPR, such as a Form I-131; Form I-212, Application for 
Permission to Reapply for Admission into the United States After 
Deportation or Removal; Form I-290B, Form I-601, and Form I-765. Id. 
Like VAWA self-petitioners filing Form I-360, these abused spouses and 
children are particularly vulnerable populations as victims of abuse. 
As there were fewer than 50 applications filed for these 2 populations 
combined in FY 2020, and the applicant files for VAWA benefits when 
filing for adjustment of status to LPR, DHS proposes to provide fee 
exemptions for the VAWA-based filing (such as for Form I-485) as well 
as associated forms. Id.
6. Abused Spouses and Children Seeking Benefits Under NACARA
    Abused spouses and children seeking benefits under the Nicaraguan 
Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) are considered VAWA 
self-petitioners as defined in INA sec. 101(a)(51)(F). As such, they 
are currently eligible for fee waivers for any forms filed through 
adjustment of status, including associated forms.\133\ See 8 CFR 
103.7(c)(3)(xviii) (Oct. 1, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \133\ See INA sec. 245(l)(7), 8 U.S.C. 1255(l)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS proposes to provide fee exemptions for abused spouses and 
children seeking benefits under NACARA for all forms filed through 
final adjudication for adjustment of status to LPR, including the 
Application for Suspension of Deportation or Special Rule Cancellation 
of Removal (Pursuant to Section 203 of Public Law 105-100 (NACARA)) 
(Form I-881) and associated forms. Proposed 8 CFR 106.3(b)(7). For 
abused spouses and children under NACARA, they must file for VAWA 
benefits while in immigration proceedings, so they will be fee exempt 
for the Form I-881, Form I-601, and Form I-765, which are forms that 
may be filed with USCIS. Victims of abuse who file for VAWA benefits in 
immigration court proceedings are a particularly vulnerable population 
of applicants as mentioned previously. Therefore, DHS proposes to 
provide fee exemptions for Form I-881 and Form I-765, which are forms 
that may be filed with USCIS. Id.
7. Abused Spouses and Children of LPRs or U.S. Citizens Under INA Sec. 
240A(b)(2)
    Currently, abused spouses and children of LPRs and U.S. citizens 
seeking cancellation of removal and adjustment of status under INA sec. 
240A(b)(2) are eligible for fee waivers for any forms filed with USCIS 
through adjustment of status to LPR, including associated forms.\134\ 
See 8 CFR 103.7(c)(3)(xviii) (Oct. 1, 2020). In this rule, DHS proposes 
that this population be exempt from the fee for an Application for 
Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility (Form I-601) and an initial 
Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765) when filed under 
8 CFR 274a.12(c)(10). See Proposed 8 CFR 106.3(b)(8). Abused spouses 
and children of LPRs and U.S. citizens seeking cancellation of removal 
and adjustment of status in immigration proceedings are a particularly 
vulnerable population. Therefore, DHS proposes to provide fee 
exemptions for the only forms that this population may file with USCIS, 
Forms I-601 and an initial I-765. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \134\ See INA sec. 245(l)(7); 8 U.S.C. 1255(l)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

8. Special Immigrant Afghan or Iraqi Translators or Interpreters, Iraqi 
Nationals Employed by or on Behalf of the U.S. Government, or Afghan 
Nationals Employed by or on Behalf of the U.S. Government or Employed 
by the International Security Assistance Force and Derivative 
Beneficiaries
    The National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2008 \135\ and 
Omnibus Appropriations Act \136\ prohibit DHS from charging any fees in 
connection with an application for, or issuance of, a special immigrant 
visa for Special Immigrant Afghan or Iraqi translators or interpreters, 
Iraqi nationals employed by or on behalf of the U.S. Government, or 
Afghan nationals employed by or on behalf of the U.S. Government or 
employed by the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). These 
applicants do not currently pay fees for Form I-360.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \135\ See Public Law 110-181 (Jan. 28, 2008).
    \136\ See Public Law 111-8 (Mar. 11, 2009).

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

[[Page 463]]

    As part of Operation Allies Welcome, beginning in July 2021, DHS 
authorized filing fee exemptions, including for Form I-485, Form I-601, 
and Form I-765, for certain Afghan nationals and their derivative 
beneficiaries meeting certain criteria, who were evacuated from 
Afghanistan due to the humanitarian crisis in that country.\137\ DHS is 
proposing to expand fee exemptions for Special Immigrant Afghan or 
Iraqi translators or interpreters, Iraqi Nationals Employed by or on 
behalf of the U.S. Government, or Afghan nationals employed by or on 
behalf of the U.S. Government or employed by the ISAF to all forms 
associated with filings from initial status filing through final 
adjudication of the adjustment of status application. Proposed 8 CFR 
106.3(b)(3). In addition, DHS is clarifying that surviving spouses and 
children of certain principal applicants who may file a petition for 
classification as a special immigrant under to section 403 of the 
Emergency Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021, Public Law 
117-31, 135 Stat. 309, 318 (July 30, 2021), are exempt from paying the 
filing fee for Form I-360.\138\ DHS believes this population, who 
assisted the United States Government often at risk to themselves and 
their families, should benefit from an immigration process that imposes 
a minimal financial burden. In addition, because the statutes provide 
that the special immigrant visa petition is fee exempt, DHS believes 
that it is consistent with those laws to provide fee exemptions for 
these additional forms that are generally filed with or associated with 
the special immigrant visa petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \137\ See U.S. Dep't of Homeland Security, ``DHS Announces Fee 
Exemptions, Streamlined Processing for Afghan Nationals as They 
Resettle in the U.S.'' (Nov. 8, 2021), available at https://www.dhs.gov/news/2021/11/08/dhs-announces-fee-exemptions-streamlined-processing-afghan-nationals-they-resettle.
    \138\ The Emergency Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 
2021, Public Law 117-31, 135 Stat. 309, 318 (July 30, 2021), removed 
the requirement that the principal noncitizen have a petition for 
special immigrant visa (SIV) classification approved, in order for 
the surviving spouse and/or children of the principal noncitizen to 
apply to obtain SIVs, and replaced it with the requirement that the 
principal noncitizen must have submitted an application for Chief of 
Mission (COM) approval under section 1244 of Public Law 110-181, 122 
Stat. 3 (Jan. 28, 2008), section 602(b) of the Afghan Allies 
Protection Act of 2009, Title VI of Public Law 111-8, 123 Stat. 524, 
807 (Mar. 11, 2009), or section 1059 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, Public Law 109-163, 119 
Stat. 3136 (Jan. 6, 2006) which included the noncitizen as an 
accompanying spouse or child, or the principal noncitizen had 
completed the special immigrant employment requirements at the time 
of their death.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

9. Special Immigrant Juveniles
    DHS currently fee exempts Form I-360 \139\ for Special Immigrant 
Juveniles (SIJs) and provides them eligibility to file a fee waiver for 
Form I-485 and associated forms \140\ as well as for a naturalization 
application.\141\ Upon classification as an SIJ, a noncitizen may be 
eligible to apply for adjustment of status to LPR if an immigrant visa 
number is immediately available. See INA sec. 245(h), 8 U.S.C. 1255(h). 
DHS is now proposing to fee exempt SIJs for all forms through final 
adjudication of the adjustment of status application, which will 
include Form I-485 and associated forms. Proposed 8 CFR 106.3(b)(1). 
SIJ petitioners and recipients are youth who have suffered abuse, 
neglect, or abandonment by one or both parents, and DHS believes that 
most SIJs have no means to pay the fees for these forms. Congress, in 
recognizing the vulnerability of these youth, has afforded special 
protections to this population, including access to federally funded 
assistance through the Unaccompanied Refugee Minors program.\142\ 
Currently, SIJs are not required to provide evidence of household 
income when applying for a fee waiver, and many are in the foster care 
system or full-time students or both, without an ability to work.\143\ 
For these reasons, most SIJs are eligible for a fee waiver. DHS is 
proposing to fee exempt SIJs through final adjudication of Form I-485 
to recognize the financial and personal situation of most SIJs, to 
reduce the burden on SIJs to request a fee waiver, and to reduce the 
burden on USCIS of adjudicating SIJ fee waivers that are generally 
approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \139\ 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(T)(3) (Oct. 1, 2020).
    \140\ 8 CFR 103.7(c)(4)(iii) (Oct. 1, 2020).
    \141\ 8 CFR 103.7(c)(3)(xiii) (Oct. 1, 2020).
    \142\ See 8 U.S.C. 1232(d)(4)(A).
    \143\ See USCIS, Instructions for Request for Fee Waiver, page 
7, available at https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/forms/i-912instr.pdf (last viewed June 1, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

10. Temporary Protected Status
    The fee for an Application for Temporary Protected Status (Form I-
821) for TPS registrations is limited to $50 by statute. See INA sec. 
244(c)(1)(B), 8 U.S.C. 1254a(c)(1)(B). In addition, TPS applicants are 
eligible for fee waivers for any forms submitted based on the 
TVPRA.\144\ DHS is not proposing any additional fee exemptions or fee 
waivers for this population.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \144\ 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); 
8 CFR 103.7(c)(3)(xviii) (Oct. 1, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS, however, is proposing to remove the fee exemption for Form I-
765 filed by initial TPS applicants under age 14 and over age 65 for 
initial EAD requests. See proposed 8 CFR 244.6(b). Currently, initial 
TPS applicants under age 14 and over age 65 are exempt from paying the 
fee for Form I-765 for initial EAD requests. See 8 CFR 244.6(b) (Oct. 
1, 2020).\145\ When the regulations implementing TPS were first 
published in 1991, the INS required all TPS applicants to file Form I-
765 for information collection purposes, even if an applicant did not 
wish to request employment authorization.\146\ At that time, INS did 
not issue EADs to minor children or persons over age 65.\147\ TPS 
applicants who did not wish to request employment authorization were 
not required to pay the fee for Form I-765. Initially, only nationals 
of El Salvador ages 14-65 who requested employment authorization were 
required to pay the fee for Form I-765. However, on April 25, 1995, INS 
revised Form I-765 to remove the El Salvador specific language from the 
form instructions and required all TPS applicants ages 14-65 who were 
requesting employment authorization to pay the fee for Form I-765, 
regardless of nationality, although fee waivers were available. The 
regulatory language was updated to reflect this change in 1999.\148\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \145\ The exemption is not codified, except by implication by 8 
CFR 244.6, which states that applicants between the ages of 14 and 
65 who are not requesting authorization to work will not be charged 
a fee for an application for employment authorization.
    \146\ See 56 FR 619 (Jan. 7, 1991), as amended at 56 FR 23497 
(May 22, 1991) (codifying 8 CFR 240.6 that provided that the fee for 
Form I-765 was not charged except for nationals from El Salvador 
between the ages of 14 to 65 who requested an EAD).
    \147\ See 56 FR 23495 (May 22, 1991).
    \148\ See 64 FR 4780-4781 (Feb. 1, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    USCIS no longer requires TPS applicants to file Form I-765 for 
information collection purposes, and only requires it if the TPS 
applicant wants an EAD. Persons applying for TPS who do not wish to 
request employment authorization need only file Form I-821.\149\ The 
reason that the INS fee exempted a Form I-765 filed by initial TPS 
applicants under age 14 and over age 65 from a fee no longer exists. 
Thus, DHS is proposing that all TPS applicants requesting employment 
authorization must pay the filing fee for Form I-765 or request a fee 
waiver.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \149\ The October 17, 2017, revision of Form I-821 made 
concurrent filing of Form I-765 optional. The May 31, 2018, revision 
of Form I-765 removed the instruction appearing on earlier 
iterations indicating that Form I-765 must be filed with Form I-821 
to register for TPS, regardless of whether the applicant was 
requesting employment authorization.

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

[[Page 464]]

11. Asylum Seekers and Asylees
    DHS is not proposing any changes to fee exemptions or fee waivers 
for asylum seekers or asylees and is proposing to codify that there is 
no fee for an Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal 
(Form I-589). Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(27). See Table 13C, Categories of 
Requestors and Related Forms Eligible for Fee Waivers under INA sec. 
245(l)(7), 8 U.S.C. 1255(l)(7), and Fee Exemptions (Includes Current 
Eligibility and Proposed Changes). In the 2020 fee rule DHS proposed a 
$50 fee for Form I-589, Application for Asylum and for Withholding of 
Removal, for when that form is filed with USCIS (``affirmative asylum 
applications''). See 8 CFR 106.2(a)(20) (Oct. 2, 2020). The U.S. 
Government had never previously charged a fee for an asylum request and 
used fees from other form types to fund the operations involved in 
processing asylum claims. However, in the 2020 fee rule DHS decided to 
impose an asylum fee of $50, and provided that the fee would not be 
waivable but exempted an unaccompanied child in removal proceedings 
from the fee. 8 CFR 106.2(a)(20) (Oct. 2, 2020). A large number of 
commenters on the 2020 fee rule generally opposed charging asylum 
applicants a fee. See 85 FR 46844. Commenters stated that asylum 
applicants have few economic resources, the few resources that they do 
have are necessary for survival, and they are often financially 
dependent on their family members. Thus, the commenters stated that the 
asylum fee would create an additional burden on asylum applicants and 
their families, be detrimental to survivors of torture, and further 
endanger asylum seekers' health and safety.
    After further consideration of the comments received on the 2020 
fee rule's asylum fee, asylum applicants' lack of resources and the 
burdens that they face, DHS proposes to remove the $50 fee for Form I-
589. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(27). DHS currently does not collect the 
$50 fee for Form I-589 as a result of the injunction against the 2020 
Fee Rule discussed above. While INA sec. 208(d)(3), 8 U.S.C. 
1158(d)(3), specifically authorizes a fee for the consideration of an 
asylum application in the discretion of the Secretary, it does not 
require such fees, and further provides that the Secretary may set 
adjudication and naturalization fees in accordance with INA sec. 
1356(m), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m). DHS believes that the fee could deter asylum 
seekers from seeking protection because of an inability to pay the fee. 
Asylum applicants, many of whom arrive in the United States with few 
resources and lack financial support, may be unable to pay the fee 
(particularly considering that most are unable to legally seek 
employment until after the approval of their application for employment 
authorization based on their pending asylum application, which cannot 
be filed together), or would choose between paying the fee and paying 
for basic needs with the few resources they may have arrived with or 
can attain before being allowed to legally seek employment in the 
United States. DHS recognizes the vulnerable situations of individuals 
who apply for asylum and has decided not to impose an asylum 
application fee, so as to not make affordability a consideration for a 
person requesting asylum.
    DHS will also continue to provide a fee exemption for the initial 
filing of Form I-765 for persons with pending asylum applications and 
those who were granted asylum (asylees). Proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(43)(iii)(D) and (G).\150\ In the 2020 fee rule, DHS required 
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. See 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(32) (Oct. 2, 2020). Previously, USCIS had exempted 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 submitted evidence of a pending asylum 
application and followed other instructions. However, in the 2020 fee 
rule, DHS determined that continuing to exempt this population from 
paying the Form I-765 fee would increase the proposed fee by $10 to 
fund the cost of EADs for asylum applicants, and required initial 
applicants with pending asylum claims to pay a $490 Form I-765 fee to 
keep the fee lower for all fee-paying EAD applicants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \150\ Except for individuals applying under special procedures 
pursuant to the settlement agreement reached in American Baptist 
Churches v. Thornburgh, 760 F. Supp. 796 (N.D. Cal. 1991).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Many commenters on the 2020 fee rule opposed the change to charge 
asylum applicants for their first Form I-765, Application for 
Employment Authorization. 85 FR 46851-46853. The commenters wrote that: 
people who cannot work cannot afford to pay their asylum fees and may 
work illegally; charging individuals who are not authorized to work to 
pay a fee to acquire work authorization is counterintuitive; asylum 
seekers are in dire financial situations; requiring a fee for 
authorization to work will worsen the already precarious situation of a 
vulnerable population; and the fee will act as an unjust deterrent for 
asylum seekers. As a result of the economic challenges faced by asylum 
seekers, DHS has determined that it agrees that charging asylum seekers 
for an initial work authorization application could prevent them from 
obtaining lawful employment, and that the EAD fee is unduly burdensome 
for asylum seekers. Therefore, DHS proposes to retain the fee exemption 
for applicants who have applied for asylum or withholding of removal 
before EOIR (defensive asylum) or filed Form I-589 with USCIS 
(affirmative asylum) for initial filings of Form I-765. See proposed 8 
CFR 106.2(a)(43)(iii)(D) and (G).
    As explained below, DHS also proposes that the fee for refugee 
travel documents for asylees and LPRs who obtained such status as 
asylees will be linked to the DOS fee for a U.S. passport. Proposed 8 
CFR 106.2(a)(7)(i) and (ii). DHS also proposes to continue charging a 
fee for asylees with pending adjustment of status applications who are 
requesting advance parole. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(7)(iii). Although 
asylees and refugees are in some respects similarly situated 
populations, certain differences justify DHS's decision not to exempt 
asylees from paying the fee for refugee travel documents or advance 
parole. Unlike refugees, who are required to apply to adjust status 
after they have been physically present in the United States for at 
least one year, asylees are not required to apply for adjustment of 
status, although they may do so. In addition, because asylees are a 
larger population than refugees, DHS determined that transferring to 
other applicants and petitioners the costs of adjudicating requests 
from asylees for refugee travel documents and advance parole would be 
overly burdensome to other fee payers. DHS believes that asylees are 
better able to time the filing of Form I-485 for adjustment of status 
to LPR or an associated benefit request with their ability to pay the 
fees or request a fee waiver.
    DHS proposes to continue fee waiver eligibility for asylees filing 
Forms I-290B, I-765 for EAD renewal, and I-485. Proposed 8 CFR 
106.3(a)(3)(ii)(C) and (E) and (a)(3)(iv)(C). DHS does not propose new 
fee exemptions or fee waivers for asylum applicants or asylees in this 
rulemaking because most forms used by this population are already fee 
exempt or fee waiver eligible. DHS also considered the number of 
asylum-based filings made each year and decided that the transfer of 
the costs of such filings

[[Page 465]]

to other petitions and applications if these filings were fee exempt 
resulted in too excessive a shift to fee payers to justify.
12. Refugees
    DHS is continuing to provide a fee exemption for the initial filing 
of Form I-765 for persons who were admitted or paroled as refugees. 
Proposed 8 CFR 106.3(b)(9)(iii). 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, ``The Contracting State shall 
accord to refugees lawfully staying in their territory the most 
favorable treatment accorded to nationals of a foreign country in the 
same circumstances, as regards the right to engage in wage-earning 
employment.'' \151\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \151\ Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, art. 17(1), 
July 28, 1951, 19 U.S.T. 6259, 189 U.N.T.S. 150. The United States 
is not a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention, but the United States 
is a party to the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, 
Jan. 31, 1967, 19 U.S.T. 6223, 606 U.N.T.S. 267, which incorporates 
Articles 2 to 34 of the 1951 Convention. See INS v. Stevic, 467 U.S. 
407, 416 & n.9 (1984).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS also proposes to provide a fee exemption for persons admitted 
or paroled as refugees who submit Form I-765 to renew or replace their 
EAD. Proposed 8 CFR 106.3(b)(9)(iii). Currently, refugees may request a 
fee waiver for such renewal and replacement applications. EAD renewal 
and replacement filing volume is low, and DHS must expend effort to 
adjudicate fee waiver requests, which are generally approved. DHS 
believes that exempting all refugee Form I-765 filings is consistent 
with the principles of the 1951 Refugee Convention cited above.
    DHS further proposes to provide a fee exemption for the filing of 
Form I-131, Application for Travel Document, for persons admitted or 
paroled as refugees, including LPRs who obtained such status as 
refugees in the United States. Proposed 8 CFR 106.3(b)(9)(i). Refugees 
are by definition a vulnerable population.\152\ Congress has recognized 
that many refugees are more likely than other immigrant populations to 
lack economic security and determined that it is in the interests of 
the United States to provide them with support and assistance on their 
path to self-sufficiency. For example, INA sec. 207(c)(3) specifies 
that the public charge ground of inadmissibility in INA sec. 212(a)(4) 
does not apply to refugees. And section 412 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1522, 
authorizes the provision of a variety of benefits and support services 
to refugees, including employment training and placement, English 
language training, cash assistance, and medical assistance. In light of 
these considerations, DHS has historically exempted refugees from 
paying fees for most applications and petitions for immigration 
benefits, excluding naturalization, for which a fee waiver is 
available. DHS now proposes to align Form I-131 with this long-standing 
policy. For the same reasons, DHS also proposes to fee exempt the 
Application for Carrier Documentation (Form I-131A) for refugees, 
persons paroled as refugees (see INA sec. 212(d)(5)(B), 8 U.S.C. 
1182(d)(5)(B)), and LPRs who obtained such status as refugees. See 8 
CFR 106.3(b)(9)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \152\ See INA sec. 101(a)(42)(A), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(42)(A) 
(defining the term ``refugee'' as ``any person who is outside any 
country of such person's nationality or, in the case of a person 
having no nationality, is outside any country in which such person 
last habitually resided, and who is unable or unwilling to return 
to, and is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the 
protection of, that country because of persecution or a well-founded 
fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, 
membership in a particular social group, or political opinion'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

13. Person Who Served Honorably on Active Duty in the U.S. Armed Forces 
Filing Under INA Sec. 101(A)(27)(K)
    An immigrant who has served honorably on active duty in the U.S. 
armed forces of the United States after October 15, 1978, after 
original lawful enlistment outside the United States (under a treaty or 
agreement in effect on October 1, 1991) for a certain period of time 
and the spouses and children of such immigrants may be granted special 
immigrant status upon recommendation under the executive department. 
INA sec. 101(a)(27)(K), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(27). These applicants may file 
for naturalization under INA sec. 328, 8 U.S.C 1439. USCIS does not 
charge a fee to military naturalization applicants because such fees 
are prohibited by statute. See INA sec. 328(b)(4), 8 U.S.C. 1439(b)(4). 
Other forms for active or former military service members are also 
exempt from fees. See, e.g., 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(AAA) and (EEE) (Oct. 
1, 2020).
    On July 2, 2021, Secretary Mayorkas and Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs Denis McDonough announced a new initiative to support our 
Nation's noncitizen service members, veterans, and the immediate family 
members of service members. The initiative recognizes the profound 
commitment and sacrifice that service members and their families have 
made to the United States and that DHS agencies would review the 
policies to remove barriers to naturalization for those eligible, and 
improve access to immigration services.\153\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \153\ See DHS, VA Announce Initiative to Support Noncitizen 
Service Members, Veterans, and Immediate Family Members (July 2, 
2021), available at https://www.dhs.gov/news/2021/07/02/dhs-va-announce-initiative-support-noncitizen-service-members-veterans-and-immediate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of this initiative on November 19, 2021, USCIS issued 
guidance to provide fee exemptions for Form I-131 concurrently filed 
with N-400 for applicants who are residing outside the United States 
and seeking naturalization.\154\ Because this population submits a low 
number of forms, and to be consistent with other fees related to 
military applicants, DHS is proposing to codify a fee exemption for 
Forms I-131 (parole requests). In addition, DHS is proposing to add fee 
exemptions for Forms I-360, I-485, and I-765 (initial request) for 
military applicants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \154\ See USCIS Policy Manual, Volume 12, Citizenship and 
Naturalization, Part I Military Members and their Families, Chapter 
5, Application and Filing for Service Members (INA sections 328 and 
329) [12 USCIS-PM I.5], available at https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-12-part-i-chapter-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

14. Summary of Proposed Fee Exemptions
    The following Table 13A provides a summary of current fee 
exemptions under INA sec. 245(l)(7). Table 13B provides a list of 
proposed additional fee exemptions, and the impact on forms that no 
longer require a fee waiver for these categories of requestors because 
they will be fee exempt. Table 13C provides a list of all fee 
exemptions and waivers that includes both the current provisions and 
the proposed additions.
BILLING CODE 9111-97-P

[[Page 466]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.035

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

    \155\ See INA sec. 101(a)(15)(T); 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(T) (T 
nonimmigrant status for victims of severe forms of trafficking in 
persons).

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

[[Page 467]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.036

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

    \156\ See INA sec. 101(a)(15)(U) 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(U) (U 
nonimmigrant status for victims of qualifying criminal activity).
    \157\ No initial fee for principals who receive an EAD incident 
to status.
    \158\ This category includes VAWA self-petitioners and 
derivatives as defined in INA sec. 101(a)(51)(A) and (B) and those 
otherwise self-petitioning for immigrant classification under INA 
sec. 204(a)(1). See INA sec. 101(a)(51); 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(51). See 
INA sec. 204(a); 8 U.S.C. 1154(a).
    \159\ Currently, VAWA self-petitioners may check a box on Form 
I-360 requesting a category (c)(31) EAD upon approval of the self-
petition. This EAD is currently fee exempt. If the self-petitioner 
does not check this box, they must file a Form I-765 to request work 
authorization under 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(14) designation or under 8 CFR 
274a.12(c)(9) if applicable. The self-petitioner may also file a 
Form I-765 to request a category (c)(31) EAD if not initially 
requested on the Form I-360. All self-petitioners and derivatives 
filing a renewal or replacement request must file a Form I-765 with 
a fee or fee waiver request.

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

[[Page 468]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.037

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

    \160\ See INA secs. 101(a)(51)(C) and 216(c)(4)(C) and (D); 8 
U.S.C. 1101(a)(51)(C) and 1186a(c)(4)(C) and (D).
    \161\ See INA sec. 101(a)(51)(D) and (E); 8 U.S.C. 
1101(a)(51)(D) and (E). The proposed fee exemption for Form I-765 
for these categories includes all initial, renewal, and replacement 
EADs filed through final adjudication for adjustment of status.
    \162\ See INA sec. 101(a)(51)(F); 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(51)(F). The 
proposed fee exemption for Form I-765 for this category includes all 
initial, renewal, and replacement EADs filed through final 
adjudication for adjustment of status.

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

[[Page 469]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.038

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

    \163\ Also includes children of battered spouses and children of 
an LPR or U.S. citizen and parents of battered children of an LPR or 
U.S. citizen under INA sec. 240A(b)(4); 8 U.S.C. 1229b(b)(4).
    \164\ See INA sec. 106; 8 U.S.C. 1105a. The proposed fee 
exemption for Form I-765 for these categories includes all initial, 
renewal, and replacement EADs. If the abused spouses of A, E-3, G, 
and H Nonimmigrants are able to file under another eligible 
category, the applicant may be eligible for a fee waiver.
    \165\ The fee exemption for Form I-765V for this category 
includes all initial, renewal, and replacement EADs.
    \166\ Afghan nationals and their derivative beneficiaries 
paroled into the United States on or after July 30, 2021 and 
applying to adjust status to permanent residence based on 
classification as Afghan special immigrants as part of the temporary 
Operation Allies Welcome (OAW) program.
    \167\ Afghan nationals and their derivative beneficiaries who 
were paroled into the United States on or after July 30, 2021. This 
is part of the temporary OAW program.
    \168\ Afghan nationals and their derivative beneficiaries 
paroled into the United States on or after July 30, 2021 who file 
Form I-601 associated with Form I-485, if filing as an Afghan 
Special Immigrant.

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

[[Page 470]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.039

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

    \169\ See INA secs. 244 and 245(l)(7); 8 U.S.C. 1254a and 
1255(l)(7). This category includes applicants and recipients of TPS.
    \170\ Note DHS is proposing to end the fee exemption for Form I-
765 initial EAD requests filed by initial TPS applicants under age 
14 and over age 65.
    \171\ These applicants are eligible for naturalization under INA 
sec. 328; 8 U.S.C. 1439. Most military applicants are eligible for 
naturalization without lawful permanent residence under INA sec. 
329; 8 U.S.C. 1440.

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

[[Page 471]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.040


[[Page 472]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.041

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

    \172\ This table includes exemptions and fee waivers that are 
required under INA sec. 245(l)(7), 8 U.S.C. 1255(l)(7) and other 
categories of immigrants for which DHS is proposing additional fee 
exemptions. This table includes only those exemptions that DHS is 
required to provide under this statute, and it does not include all 
USCIS benefit requests or groups for which DHS currently provides or 
is proposing to provide an exemption in this rule or by policy. See 
regulatory text for all other fee exemptions and fee waivers.
    \173\ This column lists all the additional fee exemptions that 
are being proposed. DHS would continue to maintain all the fee 
exemptions currently provided under Table 13A, column ``Current Fee 
Exemptions.''
    \174\ This column lists all the fee waivers that would still be 
available after some forms will be fee exempt as listed in ``Current 
Fee Exemptions'' column.
    \175\ See INA sec. 101(a)(15)(T); 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(T) (T 
nonimmigrant status for victims of severe forms of trafficking in 
persons).
    \176\ The proposed fee exemption for T nonimmigrants filing Form 
I-765 includes all initial, renewal and replacement EADs filed at 
the nonimmigrant and adjustment of status stages.
    \177\ See INA sec. 101(a)(15)(U); 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(U) (U 
nonimmigrant status for victims of qualifying criminal activity).

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

[[Page 473]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.042

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

    \178\ This category includes VAWA self-petitioners and 
derivatives as defined in INA sec. 101(a)(51)(A) and (B) and those 
otherwise self-petitioning for immigrant classification under INA 
sec. 204(a)(1). See INA sec. 101(a)(51); 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(51). See 
INA sec. 204(a); 8 U.S.C. 1154(a).
    \179\ Under this proposed rule, the category (c)(31) EAD 
provided through Form I-360 will continue to be fee exempt. In 
addition, all Form I-765s filed for an initial 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(9), 
8 CFR 274a.12(c)(14), and an initial category (c)(31) EAD will also 
be fee exempt for both self-petitioners and derivatives.
    \180\ See INA secs. 101(a)(51)(C) and 216(c)(4)(C) and (D); 8 
U.S.C. 1101(a)(51)(C) and 1186a(c)(4)(C) and (D).

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

[[Page 474]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.043

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

    \181\ See INA sec. 101(a)(51)(D) and (E); 8 U.S.C. 
1101(a)(51)(D) and (E). The proposed fee exemption for Form I-765 
for these categories includes all initial, renewal, and replacement 
EADs filed through final adjudication for adjustment of status.
    \182\ See INA sec. 101(a)(51)(F); 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(51)(F). The 
proposed fee exemption for Form I-765 for this category includes all 
initial, renewal, and replacement EADs filed through final 
adjudication for adjustment of status.
    \183\ Also includes children of battered spouses and children of 
an LPR or U.S. citizen and parents of battered children of an LPR or 
U.S. citizen under INA sec. 240A(b)(4); 8 U.S.C. 1229b(b)(4).

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

[[Page 475]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.044

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

    \184\ See INA sec. 106; 8 U.S.C. 1105a. The proposed fee 
exemption for Form I-765 for these categories includes all initial, 
renewal, and replacement EADs. If the abused spouses of A, E-3, G, 
and H Nonimmigrants are able to file under another eligible 
category, the applicant may be eligible for a fee waiver.
    \185\ See INA secs. 244 and 245(l)(7); 8 U.S.C. 1254a and 
1255(l)(7). This category includes applicants and recipients of TPS.

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

[[Page 476]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.045

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.046

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

    \186\ These applicants are eligible for naturalization under INA 
sec. 328; 8 U.S.C. 1439. Most military applicants are eligible for 
naturalization without lawful permanent residence under INA sec. 
329; 8 U.S.C. 1440.
    \187\ See INA sec. 101(a)(15)(T); 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(T)(T 
nonimmigrant status for victims of severe forms of trafficking in 
persons).

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

[[Page 477]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.047


[[Page 478]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.048


[[Page 479]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.049


[[Page 480]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.050


[[Page 481]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.051

BILLING CODE 9111-97-C
     
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \188\ See INA sec. 101(a)(15)(U); 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(U) (U 
nonimmigrant status for victims of qualifying criminal activity).
    \189\ This category includes VAWA self-petitioners and 
derivatives as defined in INA sec. 101(a)(51)(A) and (B) and those 
otherwise self-petitioning for immigrant classification under INA 
sec. 204(a)(1). See INA sec. 101(a)(51); 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(51). See 
INA sec. 204(a); 8 U.S.C. 1154(a).
    \190\ Under this proposed rule, the category (c)(31) EAD 
provided through Form I-360 will continue to be fee exempt. In 
addition, all Form I-765s filed for an initial 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(9), 
8 CFR 274a.12(c)(14), and an initial category (c)(31) EAD will also 
be fee exempt for both self-petitioners and derivatives.
    \191\ See INA secs. 101(a)(51)(C) and 216(c)(4)(C) and (D); 8 
U.S.C. 1101(a)(51)(C) and 1186a(c)(4)(C) and (D).
    \192\ See INA sec. 101(a)(51)(D) and (E); 8 U.S.C. 
1101(a)(51)(D) and (E). The proposed fee exemption for Form I-765 
for these categories includes all initial, renewal, and replacement 
EADs filed through final adjudication for adjustment of status.
    \193\ See INA sec. 101(a)(51)(F); 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(51)(F). The 
proposed fee exemption for Form I-765 for this category includes all 
initial, renewal, and replacement EADs filed through final 
adjudication for adjustment of status.
    \194\ Also includes children of battered spouses and children of 
an LPR or U.S. citizen and parents of battered children of an LPR or 
U.S. citizen under INA sec. 240A(b)(4); 8 U.S.C. 1229b(b)(4).
    \195\ See INA sec. 106; 8 U.S.C. 1105a. The proposed fee 
exemption for Form I-765 for these categories includes all initial, 
renewal, and replacement EADs. If the abused spouses of A, E-3, G, 
and H Nonimmigrants are able to file under another eligible 
category, the applicant may be eligible for a fee waiver.
    \196\ The fee exemption for Form I-765V for this category 
includes all initial, renewal, and replacement EADs.
    \197\ See INA secs. 244 and 245(l)(7); 8 U.S.C. 1254a and 
1255(l)(7). This category includes applicants and recipients of TPS.
    \198\ These applicants are eligible for naturalization under INA 
sec. 328; 8 U.S.C. 1439. Most military applicants are eligible for 
naturalization without lawful permanent residence under INA sec. 
329; 8 U.S.C. 1440.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Request for Comments

    DHS welcomes comment on the proposed changes to which categories of 
petitioners and applicants are exempt from the fees or which forms 
should be fee exempt, the annual and cumulative estimated transfer 
cost, requests to which costs should be shifted, and the reason as to 
why the particular group should be fee exempt.

VIII. Other Proposed Changes in the FY 2022/2023 Fee Schedule

A. Clarifying Dishonored Fee Check Re-Presentment Requirement and Fee 
Payment Method

    USCIS is proposing to clarify that it will not redeposit financial 
instruments returned as unpayable for a reason other than insufficient 
funds. See proposed 8 CFR 103.2(a)(7)(ii)(D). 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 another 
financial instrument) that is subsequently returned as not payable. See 
81 FR 73313-73315 (Oct. 24, 2016); 8 CFR 103.2(a)(7)(ii) and 
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. 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). DHS's intent was to 
submit only checks that were dishonored due to insufficient funds 
because the Treasury check clearance regulations only permit an agency 
to redeposit a check that was dishonored due to insufficient 
funds.\199\ Although Treasury does not permit redeposit of checks 
dishonored for any other reason, some stakeholders have interpreted 8 
CFR 103.2(a)(7)(ii)(D) as requiring DHS to redeposit any check that is 
returned as unpayable. Several petitioners have had fee payment checks 
dishonored because the petitioner (or law firms paying the fee on the 
petitioner's behalf) have placed a fraud hold on their checking 
account, stopped payment on the check, or the check failed a third-
party validation process. DHS appreciates the concerns about fraudulent 
or counterfeit checks and the impacts on petitioners and beneficiaries 
when the petitioner or their bank accidently or erroneously stop 
payments or dishonor checks. In the few cases where checks to USCIS 
have been dishonored due to anti-fraud mechanisms, USCIS has not seen 
an

[[Page 482]]

instance where the account was frozen as a result of actual, fraudulent 
activity, and the remitting institution has acknowledged its fault or 
error in dishonoring the fee checks. Nevertheless, USCIS is not 
responsible for ensuring that a petitioner's or financial institution's 
check writing procedures do not go awry and allowing resubmission of 
correctly rejected requests adds work to an already burdened USCIS 
intake system. In addition to most redeposits being impracticable and 
in violation of Treasury regulations, the reason DHS provided the check 
representment requirement in Sec.  103.2(a)(7)(ii)(D) did not 
materialize, because in the almost five years since the requirement was 
codified, DHS has rejected no payment because of USCIS error or network 
outages. See 81 FR 73314.\200\ Therefore, to comply with the Treasury 
regulations, because representment of other dishonored checks is not 
permitted and futile, and representment has proven to not be necessary 
to protect the public from the Government failings that were feared 
when the provision was implemented, 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. See proposed 8 CFR 
103.2(a)(7)(ii)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \199\ See 31 CFR 210.3(b)(1)(i); National Automated Clearing 
House Association, 2019 NACHA Operating Rules & Guidelines: The 
Guide to the Rules Governing the ACH Network, Subsection 2.5.13.3 
(limiting redepositing a check to those that are returned due to 
``Not Sufficient Funds,'' ``NSF,'' ``Uncollected Funds,'' or 
comparable).
    \200\ The final FY 2016/2017 fee rule stated, ``To make sure 
that a payment rejection is the result of insufficient funds and not 
due to USCIS error or network outages, USCIS (through Treasury) will 
resubmit rejected payment instruments to the appropriate financial 
institution one time.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, DHS proposes two changes to address stale or expired 
checks. First, DHS proposes that that it may reject a request that is 
accompanied by a check that is dated more than 365 days before the 
receipt date. Proposed 8 CFR 103.2(a)(7)(ii)(D). Second, DHS proposes 
that it will not be responsible for financial instruments that expire 
before they are deposited and USCIS may reject any filing for which a 
required payment cannot be processed due to expiration of the financial 
instrument. Proposed 8 CFR 106.1(d).
    Currently, USCIS policy is to reject a check that is dated more 
than a year before it is 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 \201\ and adjudicated 
a Form I-485 filed after the applicant's U nonimmigrant status had 
expired because the initial, timely filing was rejected because the 
applicant submitted a fee check that was more than one year old.\202\ 
While most personal and business checks do not expire, they become what 
is known as ``stale dated'' 6 months after they are written.\203\ In 
addition, many business entities provide that their checks expire after 
a certain period, such as 90 days, if not cashed, because they are 
concerned about the timeliness and accuracy of their accounting records 
if checks that they issue are valid for a longer period, 
notwithstanding that the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) provides that a 
bank may delay access to the funds from or is not obligated to deposit, 
cash, honor, or pay a stale check.\204\ USCIS projects that it will 
receive an average of 6,510,442 IEFA non-premium fee payments per 
year.\205\ It is important that its requirements for payment 
instruments provide certainty and minimize the likelihood of a payment 
being dishonored. And, while USCIS has experienced delays in receipting 
requests due to the COVID pandemic, many requests have been received 
with checks that are very close to the check expiration date.\206\ To 
reduce dishonored payments and to alert those who submit fee checks to 
USCIS to monitor their expiration dates, DHS proposes to codify its 
policy of rejecting 365-day-old checks and checks where the expiration 
date on their face has passed to provide requestors with a reasonable 
amount of flexibility in case there are delays with their filing. 
Proposed 8 CFR 103.2(a)(7)(ii)(D); 106.1(d). Although commercial banks 
use a guideline of 6 months, 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 1 year after the date of issuance of the 
check or within 1 year after October 1, 1989, whichever is later.). 
Rejection of a stale or expired check will not be mandatory, so USCIS 
will still have the authority to waive the check date requirements in 
exigent circumstances or on a per case basis, such as when surges in 
volume reduce USCIS' ability to timely intake requests and deposit 
checks. For example, USCIS offered flexibility to lockbox filers whose 
initial filings were rejected solely because a filing fee payment that 
expired while the benefit request was awaiting processing between Oct. 
1, 2020, and April 1, 2021.\207\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \201\ See 8 CFR 244.17(a) (``Applicants for periodic re-
registration must apply during the registration period provided by 
USCIS.'').
    \202\ See 8 CFR 245.24(b)(2)(ii) (requiring the applicant to 
hold U nonimmigrant status at the time of application).
    \203\ 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 6 months after its date, but it may charge 
its customer's account for a payment made thereafter in good faith. 
See UCC 4-404 (2002).
    \204\ Id. See also Aliaga Medical Center, S.C. v. Harris Bank 
N.A., 21 NE3d 1203 (IL App (1st), Nov. 10, 2014) (holding that check 
expiration is generally governed by the account agreement between 
the bank and customer and the preprinted term ``void'' or phrase 
``void after 90 days,'' on a check does not mean that the check 
cannot be presented, paid, and accounted for as a check in the 
normal course of the account's regular operation).
    \205\ See section V.B.1.b, Fee-Paying Volume, of this preamble.
    \206\ See, e.g., USCIS Lockbox Updates, at https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-lockbox-updates (Jan. 8, 2021).
    \207\ See USCIS, ``USCIS Announces Lockbox Filing 
Flexibilities,'' available at https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-announces-lockbox-filing-flexibilities (June 10, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Payment Method

    Currently, USCIS uses the following payment methods:
     For forms accepted at USCIS lockboxes \208\--Check, money 
order, or credit card.\209\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \208\ Lockboxes that specialize in the intake and deposit of 
multiple payment types receive about 53 percent of all USCIS 
filings.
    \209\ USCIS recently launched a pilot program to test the 
acceptance of credit cards for payment of fees for benefit requests 
filed at service centers. See USCIS, ``USCIS Announces Pilot Program 
for Credit Card Payments Using Form G-1450 When Filing Form I-485,'' 
available at https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-announces-pilot-program-for-credit-card-payments-using-form-g-1450-when-filing-form-i-485 (June 2, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     For online filing--Pay.gov payment submission which 
includes credit cards, debit cards and Electronic Funds Transfer using 
routing and account numbers.
     For fees paid at a field office--Pay.gov only.
     For immigrant fees paid by immigrants seeking entry into 
the United States with a visa--Pay.gov only.
    DHS also proposes to codify that USCIS may require that certain 
fees be paid using a certain payment method or that certain fees cannot 
be paid using a particular method. Proposed 8 CFR 106.1(b). For 
example, USCIS may require that a request be submitted by using 
Pay.gov, a secure portal that transmits an applicant's payment 
information directly to the U.S. Treasury for processing, or may 
preclude the use of certain payment

[[Page 483]]

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 the payment method will be described in 
the form instructions (including for online filing) or by individual 
notice (a bill, invoice, appointment confirmation, etc.); thereby, 
requestors will be clearly notified of any limitations on the payment 
method for the request they are filing. However, this proposed change 
provides the authority prospectively, and USCIS is proposing no forms 
changes with this rule that will impose any specific limits on 
acceptable payments on the date this rule would take effect. The 
payment method for a particular form will be changed in the future only 
after the subject form instructions are revised in accordance with the 
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA).
    For the 2020 fee rule, commenters wrote that requiring online or 
electronic payments would restrict immigration benefits for individuals 
who lack computer and internet access, that it is important to permit 
cashier's checks and money orders because they are available to 
individuals without banking services such as a credit card, and that 
many immigrant households lack access to checking and savings accounts 
or they are unbanked or underbanked. 85 FR 46877. DHS has determined 
that any person who can purchase a cashier's check or money order from 
a retailer can similarly purchase a prepaid debit card that can be used 
to pay their benefit request fee using USCIS Form G-1450 or the Pay.gov 
online payment platform. In addition, filers may split the fees between 
more than one credit card, and the credit card does not have to be the 
applicant's if the owner of the credit card authorizes its use. 
Therefore, DHS believes that requiring the use of a check, credit, or 
debit card will not prevent applicants or petitioners from paying the 
required fees. While DHS does not permit the use of gift cards that 
cannot be reloaded, reloadable debit cards are available for purchase 
at most convenience, pharmacy, department, and grocery stores, or 
online.\210\ In addition, resources such as libraries offer free online 
services, access to information, and computers that the public may use 
to access forms and complete, print or submit them. Nevertheless, in 
evaluating future changes to acceptable means of payment for each 
immigration benefit request, DHS will consider the availability of 
internet access and different means of payment to the affected 
populations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \210\ See, for example, ``Visa Prepaid Cards Easy to use and 
reloadable, Visa Prepaid cards go everywhere you do. No credit check 
or bank account needed.'' https://usa.visa.com/pay-with-visa/find-card/get-prepaid-card (last viewed June 15, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lockboxes that specialize in the intake and deposit of multiple 
payment types receive about 53 percent of all USCIS filings. 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; U.S. Treasury, ``Treasury 
Financial Manual'' Vol. 1, Part 5, Chapter 2000, Section 2055.\211\ 
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); U.S. Treasury, ``Treasury 
Financial Manual'' Vol 1, Part 5, Chapter 2000, Section 2030; see also 
GAO, GAO-14-704G ``Standards for Internal Control in the Federal 
Government'' (2014).\212\ The time that USCIS spends complying with 
payment processing requirements could be used to adjudicate cases. This 
proposed change to codify that fees must be paid using the method that 
USCIS prescribes, as provided in the form instructions or by individual 
notice, would also permit USCIS to reduce administrative burdens and 
processing errors associated with fee payments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \211\ 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.
    \212\ Principle 10, Design Control Activities, states that 
management should control information processing and segregation of 
duties to reduce risk, and it should correctly and promptly record 
transactions. GAO, ``Standards for Internal Control in the Federal 
Government'' (Sept. 10, 2014), https://www.gao.gov/assets/670/665712.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Non-Refundable Fees

    Currently, USCIS filing fees generally are non-refundable and must 
be paid when the benefit request is filed. See 8 CFR 103.2(a)(1). DHS 
is proposing to clarify that fees are non-refundable regardless of the 
result of the immigration benefit request or how much time passes 
between USCIS' receipt of the request and completion of the 
adjudication process.\213\ As previously discussed, DHS is authorized 
to establish fees to recover the costs of providing USCIS adjudication 
and naturalization services. See INA sec. 286(m) and (n); 8 U.S.C. 
1356(m) and (n). Although fees are set to recover the cost of 
processing an immigration benefit request, they must be paid in advance 
of the request being processed. Therefore, fees are due at the time of 
filing and are required in order for USCIS to receipt the request and 
issue 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), and 
the fee is not refundable, regardless of how much time is required to 
complete adjudication or the decision that USCIS makes on the case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \213\ In USCIS parlance, rejection of a receipt happens in the 
initial filing stage. USCIS provides a receipt notice for accepted 
requests and a rejection notice for rejected requests. See 8 CFR 
103.2(a)(7). For example, Form I-797C, Notice of Action, will state 
if a request was accepted or rejected. A denial, on the other hand, 
is a decision that the request is not eligible for immigration 
benefits for which it was filed after adjudication. Fees are not 
returned when a request is denied.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because fees are non-refundable, DHS further proposes to clarify 
that fees paid to USCIS using a credit card are not subject to dispute, 
chargeback, forced refund, or return to the cardholder for any reason 
except at the discretion of USCIS. USCIS continues to expand the 
acceptance of credit cards for the payment of USCIS fees. 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 USCIS' retention of the fee. 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 was unreasonably delayed. USCIS records show that 
credit card companies generally side with their cardholders in these 
disputes and they determine that USCIS fails to adequately warn the 
cardholder that the fee is not refundable and due regardless of the 
result of the case or the time required to adjudicate it.\214\ In those 
instances, USCIS has not received payment for adjudication of the 
request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \214\ In FY 2020, credit card issuers revoked the fee from USCIS 
in 855 of 1,182 disputes filed, or roughly 72 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When USCIS performs services for which a fee has not been paid, 
such as when the fee is charged-back by a credit card company, the 
costs incurred must

[[Page 484]]

be funded by other fee payers. As the dollar amount of fees paid with 
credit cards continues to increase, an increase in the number of credit 
card disputes and chargebacks has the potential to have a significant 
negative fiscal effect on USCIS. Therefore, DHS is proposing to provide 
that fees paid to USCIS for immigration benefit requests will not be 
refunded regardless of the result of the benefit request or how much 
time the adjudication requires, and that fees paid to USCIS using a 
credit card are not subject to dispute by the cardholder or charge-back 
by the issuing financial institution. See proposed 8 CFR 103.2(a)(1); 8 
CFR 106.1(e). If the institution that issues the credit card rescinds 
the payment of the fee to USCIS, USCIS may reject the request if 
adjudication is not complete, or revoke the approval or convert the 
denial to rejection, and invoice the responsible party (applicant, 
petitioner, or requestor) and pursue collection of the unpaid fee in 
accordance with 31 CFR parts 900 through 904 (Federal Claims Collection 
Standards) if the adjudication is complete.\215\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \215\ USCIS may also prohibit the payment of fees using a credit 
card from a financial institution that routinely rescinds fee 
payments due to disputes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Eliminating $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) (Oct. 1, 2020). USCIS 
data indicate 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. In FY 2020, USCIS recovered only 
$199,829 from the returned check fee. Although USCIS no longer 
discretely tracks the costs associated with processing returned checks, 
USCIS is at a net loss when processing returned checks. USCIS also 
bears the cost and time of processing the returned check. Furthermore, 
USCIS does not retain the $30 fee for deposit into the IEFA with other 
immigration benefit request fees. USCIS deposits the fee in Treasury's 
general fund; thus the $30 fee does not provide revenue to USCIS. As 
such, USCIS would not benefit from DHS proposing changes to this fee.
    Although agencies may prescribe regulations establishing the charge 
for a service or thing of value provided by the agency \216\ 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. 
Based on the cost to USCIS and that the bad check fees add nothing to 
USCIS revenue, DHS proposes to remove the $30 fee from regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \216\ See 31 U.S.C. 9701.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Changes to Biometric Services Fee

1. Incorporating Biometric Activities Into Immigrant Benefit Request 
Fees
    DHS proposes to incorporate the biometric services cost into the 
underlying immigration benefit request fees based on the applicable 
biometric services for each benefit request and the associated costs as 
estimated in the ABC model. Currently, a separate $85 biometric 
services fee may apply depending on the immigration benefit request 
\217\ or other circumstances. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(C) (Oct. 1, 
2020). USCIS currently provides web content, form 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) (Oct. 1, 2020). DHS proposes to 
incorporate the cost of biometric services into the underlying 
immigration benefit request fees using its ABC model 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \217\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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, criminal background checks, investigating and addressing 
national security concerns, and maintaining program integrity.
    In previous fee rules, USCIS evaluated the biometric activity cost 
as a single biometric services 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 submit biometrics or be interviewed and pay the biometric services 
fee. See 81 FR 26917 and 81 FR 73325. For many years, there has been a 
single biometric services fee that 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 2022/2023 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.\218\ 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 used the average 
proportion of workload for each immigration benefit request. The data 
on ASC Production and FBI Name Checks are from FY 2015 to FY 2017. The 
FBI Fingerprints data used FY 2016 to FY 2018. While the information 
does not cover the most recent years, USCIS believes it is the most 
appropriate information to use for this calculation because it reflects 
biometric collection rates before the pandemic and before increased 
collection of biometrics for certain populations. For example, the data 
excludes higher biometric service rates for Form I-539 after a 2019 
form revision.\219\ USCIS temporarily suspended biometric collection 
for Form I-539 during the pandemic.\220\ Thus, the information 
considered will more closely reflect the annual volume of biometrics 
submissions that USCIS expects during FY 2022/2023. 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 submission of

[[Page 485]]

biometrics 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 (b). As such, a single adoption petition or 
application may require more than one adult to submit biometric 
information. Using biometric volumes specific to individual biometric 
activities enables USCIS to better forecast biometric costs and 
attribute them to specific benefit requests. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \218\ The single biometric service activity was called Perform 
Biometric Services in the FY 2016/2017 fee review. See 81 FR 26913-
26914. Previously, USCIS called the activity Capture Biometrics. See 
75 FR 33459 (June 11, 2010) and 72 FR 4897 (Feb. 1, 2007).
    \219\ See USCIS, ``UPDATE: USCIS to Publish Revised Form I-539 
and New Form I-539A on March 8'' available at https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/update-uscis-to-publish-revised-form-i-539-and-new-form-i-539a-on-march-8 (last updated March 5, 2019).
    \220\ See USCIS, ``USCIS Temporarily Suspends Biometrics 
Requirement for Certain Form I-539 Applicants'' available at https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-temporarily-suspends-biometrics-requirement-for-certain-form-i-539-applicants (last updated May 13, 
2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed changes in this rule may assist USCIS as it shifts to 
enterprise-wide person-centric identity management. A person-centric 
view of the data allows adjudicators to see relevant information for an 
individual across multiple benefits requests and systems. USCIS aims to 
improve how it acquires, stores, manages, shares, and uses identity 
data--making all relevant information accessible and usable in support 
of adjudications. For example, if USCIS modifies the types of 
background checks conducted, then DHS may propose to increase the fee 
as appropriate for the affected immigration benefit requests. This 
approach may ensure that the affected customers would pay the 
appropriate fee rather than pass the cost burden of all other biometric 
services to other unrelated customers.
    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 TPS, consistent with the previous fee 
rule. See 81 FR 73312-73313. 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. See proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(48)(iii).
    While the TPS registration fee is capped by INA sec. 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 for Form I-765, 
Application for Employment Authorization, if they want an employment 
authorization document. See Instructions for Form I-821. 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.
    To reduce the costs of TPS that USCIS must recover from fees 
charged to other immigration benefit requests, DHS proposes to require 
a $30 biometric services fee for TPS initial applications and re-
registrations. See proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(48)(iii). As stated 
previously, while DHS follows OMB Circular A-25, we are not required to 
set specific fees at the costs of the benefit request or adjudication 
or naturalization service for which the fee is being charged. 
Nevertheless, DHS based the proposed $30 biometric services fee on the 
direct costs of collecting, storing, and using biometric information 
for TPS initial applications and re-registrations. Currently, USCIS 
pays approximately $11.25 to the FBI for fingerprinting results. USCIS 
calculated that biometric collection, storage, and use at an ASC costs 
approximately $19.50. These same ASC and FBI rates apply to TPS and all 
other requests that use these services. The sum of these costs is 
approximately $31. DHS rounded the proposed fee to the nearest $5 
increment, similar to other IEFA fees, making the proposed fee $30. 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 Biometric Services Fee
    Similarly, DHS is maintaining the current requirement that 
applicants filing certain requests with EOIR \221\ submit a biometric 
services fee. See 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.\222\ This fee is necessary to recover the costs USCIS 
incurs performing that service for EOIR. When individuals in 
immigration proceedings before EOIR seek to file an application for 
relief or protection from removal with the immigration court they are 
instructed to pay any applicable biometrics and application fees to 
DHS. See 8 CFR 1103.7(a)(3).\223\ As previously explained, while DHS 
proposes to incorporate the costs of biometric services into its 
underlying immigration benefit request fees, DHS has no authority to 
change the amounts it receives from any EOIR fees to recover the costs 
it incurs for biometric services (which includes background checks).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \221\ EOIR is a component of the DOJ and includes the Office of 
the Director, the Board of Immigration Appeals, the Office of the 
Chief Immigration Judge, the Office of the Chief Administrative 
Hearing Officer, the Office of Policy, 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, and 
adjudicated by, EOIR, for which biometrics may be required.
    \222\ Guidance is available at ``Immigration Benefits in EOIR 
Removal Proceedings,'' at https://www.uscis.gov/laws/immigration-benefits-eoir-removal-proceedings (last updated Aug. 5, 2020).
    \223\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under this proposed rule, DHS proposes to adjust the biometric 
services fee for those requests filed with and processed by USCIS. DHS 
proposes to use the same $30 fee using the same estimates as described 
for the proposed TPS biometrics fee above. Consequently, DHS proposes a 
biometric services fee of $30 for certain forms for which it performs 
intake and biometrics services on behalf of EOIR. See proposed 8 CFR 
103.7(a)(2).

F. Naturalization and Citizenship-Related Forms

    Aside from updating the fees for naturalization and citizenship-
related forms, DHS proposes to continue offering fee waivers for the 
naturalization forms. See section VI.E of this preamble. For a general 
discussion on how fee waivers, limited fee increases, and fee 
exemptions affect proposed fees, see section IV of this preamble.
    The fee-paying unit costs represent the estimated cost per fee-
paying applicant as calculated in the USCIS

[[Page 486]]

ABC model.\224\ However, as to Forms N-565 and N-600K, both the current 
fees and the proposed fees are less than the estimated cost (fee-paying 
unit cost) for each naturalization form. For example, the current fee 
for Form N-400 is $231 less than the fee-paying unit cost estimated in 
the FY 2016/2017 fee rule. See Table 14. The proposed fee for Form N-
400 is $296 less than the estimated FY 2022/2023 fee-paying unit cost. 
Id. As such, while DHS proposes to increase the fee for Form N-400, DHS 
likewise proposes to recover a smaller percentage of the estimated cost 
for adjudicating Form N-400 than it does in its current fee structure. 
If the two difference columns in Table 14 are negative, then DHS 
proposes to maintain the current practice by keeping the proposed fee 
below the estimated cost. If the two difference columns are positive, 
then DHS proposes to recover more than full cost in order to fund 
operations and policy objectives, like offering fee waivers and 
charging less than full cost for other naturalization fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \224\ For more information, see the FY Immigration Examinations 
Fee Account Fee Review Supporting Documentation (supporting 
documentation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS further proposes separate online and paper fees for some 
benefit types. Proposed online filing fees are lower than proposed 
paper filing fees, when available. See section VIII.G of this preamble. 
However, DHS does not propose separate online and paper filing fees for 
naturalization services because the proposed naturalization fees are 
based on the current fees instead of ABC model results. Specifically, 
as a general matter, the proposed fees are approximately 18 percent 
more than the current fees, based on a calculation described in section 
V.B.3 of this preamble. However, for Forms N-565 and N-600K, the 
proposed fees are below the estimated cost from the ABC model, thus DHS 
proposes no discount for online filing of the N-forms.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.052

1. Application for Naturalization (Form N-400) Fee
    DHS proposes to increase the fee for Form N-400, Application for 
Naturalization, from $640 to $760, a $120 or 19 percent increase. See 8 
CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(BBB) (Oct. 1, 2020); proposed 8 CFR 106.2(b)(4). 
Most naturalization applicants pay an additional $85 biometric services 
fee, making the current total fees for Form N-400 total $725. This rule 
proposes to add the cost of biometric services to the underlying form 
fee. See section VIII.E of this preamble. As such, the proposed fee for 
Form N-400 is only $35 or approximately 5 percent more than the current 
Form N-400 and biometric service fees that most applicants currently 
pay. For comparison, the inflation since the current fees became 
effective is approximately 19.75 percent.\225\ If DHS adjusted the Form 
N-400 and biometric services fees by

[[Page 487]]

inflation, then the proposed fees would total $865, $140 more than the 
current fees for Form N-400.\226\ DHS provides this inflation-adjusted 
fee amount only as a point of comparison.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \225\ Current fees became effective on Dec. 23, 2016. See 81 FR 
73292. The consumer price index for all urban consumers (CPI-U) was 
241.432 in Dec. 2016 and 289.109 in Mar. 2022. The change in the 
Index over these two periods was 47.68 or 19.75 percent. See U.S. 
Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, All Urban Consumers 
(CPI-U) tables, available at https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUUR0000SA0. DHS has not recently adjusted IEFA fees by CPI-U 
inflation, but provides this figure as a point of comparison.
    \226\ The inflation adjusted amounts using this example would be 
as follows: N-400: $640 multiplied by 1.1975, which is approximately 
$766.38; biometric services fee: $85 multiplied by 1.1975, which is 
approximately $101.79. DHS rounds fees to the nearest $5. Rounded to 
the nearest $5, the inflation adjusted fees would be $765 and $100, 
totaling $865.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Prior fee rules shifted a portion of the Form N-400 cost to other 
fee-paying immigration benefit requestors, and DHS proposes to maintain 
that approach. In the FY 2010/2011 and the FY 2016/2017 fee rules, the 
Form N-400 fee was set below the ABC model output; in other words, the 
fee was less than the estimated cost per fee-paying receipt. 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 eight percent increase. See 81 FR 73307.
    The FY 2010/2011 proposed rule explained that holding the fee for 
the Form N-400 to the FY 2008/2009 fee raised all other proposed fees 
by approximately $8 each. See 75 FR 33462 (June 11, 2010). For DHS to 
recover the full cost of adjudicating the Form N-400, the FY 2010/2011 
proposed fee would have been $655, a $60 or roughly a 10 percent 
increase. See 75 FR 33462-33463. 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.\227\ In this proposed rule, the estimated cost of Form 
N-400, including biometrics, is $1,003 when filed online and $1,135 
when filed on paper. If DHS were to maintain the current $640 fee, then 
all other proposed fees would increase by an additional average $12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \227\ 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. See Appendix VI of the supporting 
documentation included in this docket for more information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.\228\ In the 2020 fee rule, 
DHS increased the fee for Form N-400, Application for Naturalization, 
from $640 to $1,170. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(BBB); 8 CFR 106.2(b)(3) 
(Oct. 2, 2020). DHS determined that shifting costs to other applicants 
in the manner that it had in previous fee rules was ``not equitable'' 
given the significant increase in Form N-400 filings in recent years. 
See 84 FR 62316. Therefore, to mitigate the fee increase of other 
immigration benefit requests and to emphasize the beneficiary-pays 
principle, DHS did not limit the Form N-400 fee and set a $1,170 fee 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. As stated earlier, DHS 
proposes to shift away from emphasizing the beneficiary-pays principle 
and return towards the historical balance between the beneficiary-pays 
and ability-to-pay principles. DHS has determined that shifting costs 
to other applicants in this manner is rational considering the 
significant value that the United States obtains from the 
naturalization of new citizens. Many commenters on the 2020 fee rule 
stated that the fee would deter eligible applicants, and cited peer-
reviewed studies indicating that cost can be a prohibitive barrier for 
would-be naturalization applicants. DHS is committed to promoting 
naturalization and immigrant integration and making sure that 
naturalization is readily accessible. Thus, DHS proposes setting the 
Form N-400 fee at an amount less than its estimated costs and shifting 
those costs to other fee payers using the cost reallocation 
methodology.\229\ Therefore, DHS proposes to limit the Form N-400 fee 
at $760 to partially recover the full cost of the Form N-400 and 
biometrics services while promoting naturalization and integration. If 
the full costs of administering USCIS programs to be recovered under 
this rule decrease due to increases in revenue or gains in efficiency 
between this proposed rule and the final rule, DHS will consider using 
those cost reductions in to further reduce the Form N-400 fee, 
considering the value of naturalization and immigrant integration, or 
to reduce other fees based on policy considerations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \228\ See, for example, 75 FR 33461; 81 FR 26916.
    \229\ Based on filing volume trends in recent years, USCIS 
forecasts an increase of 62,165 Form N-400 applications, nearly a 10 
percent increase from the FY 2016/2017 fee rule forecast. See Table 
7, Workload Volume Comparison.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Request for Reduced Fee (Form I-942)
    In addition to updating the Form N-400 fee waiver requests, as 
previously explained, DHS proposes to keep the reduced fee option for 
those naturalization applicants with family incomes not more than 200 
percent of the FPG. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(BBB)(1) (Oct. 1, 2020). 
The current N-400 reduced fee is $320 plus the $85 biometrics fee. The 
proposed N-400 reduced fee is $380, a $60 or approximately 19 percent 
increase from the current $320 fee but less than the current total cost 
($405) with added $85 separate biometrics fee. See proposed 
106.2(b)(4)(ii). Like the proposed Form N-400 fee, the proposed reduced 
fee is a limited 18 percent increase from the current fee ($320), 
rounded to the nearest $5. See Section V.B.3 of this preamble. Like 
most proposed fees, it includes the cost of biometric services. See 
section VIII.E. of this preamble. However, the biometric services fee 
was not part of the calculation for the proposed fee. DHS calculated 
the proposed fee for the reduced fee option the same way as the full 
fee option, as described in section V.B.3 of this preamble.
    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 Form I-942, 
Request for Reduced Fee, along with their 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 eliminated the Form I-942 and reduced fee in the 2020 fee rule 
to recover the estimated full cost for naturalization services and to 
reduce the administrative burden on the agency to process the Form I-
942. See 84 FR 62317; 85 FR 46860. Commenters on the change wrote that 
eliminating the reduced fee would make it difficult for immigrants with 
income between 150 percent and 200 percent of the poverty level to 
afford citizenship. DHS acknowledges that eliminating the reduced fee 
for Form N-400 would block people from receiving a reduced fee, 
increase the number of people who are required to pay the full Form N-
400 fee, and could result in fewer people applying for naturalization.
    DHS implemented this reduced fee option in the FY 2016/2017 fee 
rule to limit potential economic disincentives that some eligible 
naturalization applicants may face when deciding whether to seek U.S. 
citizenship. See 81 FR 73307. DHS only proposes that the income level 
for the reduced fee is not limited to start at 150 percent of the

[[Page 488]]

FPG. Instead, any applicant who has an income under 200 percent of the 
FPG can request a naturalization application with a reduced fee if 
eligible.\230\ DHS had originally proposed the reduced fee option for 
low-income applicants in support of 2015 immigration integration 
policies and the USCIS mission to support aspiring citizens.\231\ The 
reduced fee helps ensure that many immigrants whose goal it is to apply 
for naturalization are not unnecessarily limited by their economic 
means. Other fee payers are required to bear the cost of the reduced 
fee, but the importance of naturalization justifies the slight shift of 
burden.\232\ Similarly, in keeping the reduced fee for the 
naturalization application, DHS is supporting and complying with 
Executive Order 14012 to reduce barriers and promote accessibility to 
the immigration benefits that it administers. See 86 FR 8277 (Feb. 2, 
2021) (E.O. 14012). Although receipts of I-942 have remained relatively 
low, the overall lower cost for a reduced N-400 application may 
increase access to naturalization applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \230\ In 2018, Congress also 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 FPG, who are not currently eligible for a fee waiver.'' H. 
Rep. 115-948 at 61.
    \231\ See The White House Task Force on New Americans, 
``Strengthening Communities by Welcoming All Residents'', at 28-29 
(2015), available at https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/docs/final_tf_newamericans_report_4-14-15_clean.pdf.
    \232\ DHS previously stated that adjusting fee levels based on 
income would be administratively complex and would require higher 
costs to administer. See 75 FR 58971. Specifically, in 2010, DHS 
stated that a tiered fee system would impose an unreasonable cost 
and administrative burden, because it would require staff dedicated 
to income verification and necessitate significant information 
system changes to accommodate multiple fee scenarios. See id. DHS 
will need to reprogram intake operations for Form N-400 to recognize 
the new fee and documentation. Staff must be added to review the 
income documentation provided to determine if the applicant 
qualifies for the new fee. DHS has determined that the change 
proposed here, because it applies only to Form N-400 and the act of 
acquiring citizenship, is of sufficient value from a public policy 
standpoint to justify USCIS incurring the additional administrative 
and adjudicative burden and the cost of such covered by other fee 
payers, which as explained below is limited.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In FY 2020, 3,430 people submitted a reduced fee Form N-400.\233\ 
This represents approximately 0.47 percent of the people who paid for 
Form N-400 in FY 2020. USCIS forecasts 3,763 average annual receipts 
for the reduced Form N-400 in this proposed rule. As such, DHS 
estimates that the reduced fee option for N-400 may provide 
approximately $1.4 million in revenue with the proposed fee. If DHS 
were to propose ending the reduced fee option, it would have almost no 
effect on the resulting fee schedule. Two proposed fees would increase 
by $5 and one would increase by $10, but all other proposed fees would 
remain the same. DHS proposes to maintain the reduced fee \234\ to 
further promote naturalization and limit a barrier to naturalization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \233\ Based on actual FY 2020 revenue collections, 3,430 people 
filed Form N-400 with Form I-942. In the same year, 726,519 paid the 
full fee for Form N-400. Thus, the total fee-paying volume for both 
is 729,949. Reduced fee applicants represented approximately 0.47 
percent of total Form N-400 applicants.
    \234\ This includes a reversal of the 2020 fee rule's removal of 
the Form I-942.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Military Naturalization and Certificates of Citizenship
    DHS does not propose any changes to fee exemptions for current and 
former military service members who file a Form N-400 under the 
military naturalization provisions.\235\ Military naturalization 
applications will continue to be fee exempt. See 8 CFR 
103.7(b)(1)(i)(BBB)(2) (Oct. 1, 2020); proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(b)(4)(i).\236\ 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), 8 U.S.C. 1439 (b)(4), 8 U.S.C. 
1440(b)(4). Applicants who request a hearing on a naturalization 
decision under INA sec. 328 or 329 with respect to military service 
will continue to be fee exempt. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(AAA) (Oct. 1, 
2020); proposed 8 CFR 106.2(b)(3). Current or former military members 
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)(i)(EEE) (Oct. 1, 2020); proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(b)(8). While the statute prohibits fees for military 
naturalization applicants themselves, DoD currently reimburses USCIS 
for costs related to such applications.\237\ Accordingly, USCIS does 
not propose to increase other fees to subsidize the costs of military 
naturalization applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \235\ DHS notes that no other applicant is exempt from the Form 
N-400 fee but any other applicant submitting a Form N-400 may 
request a fee waiver.
    \236\ DHS made no changes to the fee exemptions for military 
members and veterans in the 2020 fee rule. See 84 FR 62317.
    \237\ The proposed fee would increase the reimbursable agreement 
between USCIS and DoD by $199,500. The current fees for Form N-400 
($640) and biometric services ($85) total $725 per military 
naturalization. In FY 2022/2023, USCIS forecasts an average of 5,700 
military naturalizations per year. Under the current fees, this 
would cost DoD $4,132,500 on average each year. With the proposed 
$760 Form N-400 fee (which includes the cost of biometrics), the 
same volume would cost $4,332,000, a $199,500 or approximately 5 
percent increase.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Application for Certificate of Citizenship (Form N-600) and 
Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate Under Section 
322 (Form N-600K)
    As discussed earlier in this preamble, DHS bases most proposed fees 
on fee-paying unit costs from the ABC model. See section V.B.3., 
Assessing Proposed fees. Other proposed fees, such as those for 
naturalizations forms, are based the current fees plus a limited fee 
increase. Id. The current fee for Forms N-600 and N-600K was based on 
USCIS data that showed approximately one-third of Form N-600 filers 
received fee waivers. See 81 FR 73298. In fact, the substantial fee 
increase in the FY 2016/2017 fee rule was primarily due to the 
availability of fee waivers for other N-600s and N-600Ks. Id. In the 
2010 final rule, DHS assumed that every applicant would pay the fee for 
Forms N-600 and N-600K.\238\ However, the fee-paying volume estimate 
for Forms N-600 and N-600K decreased from 100 percent in FY 2010/2011 
to 67 percent in FY 2016/2017 to reflect USCIS data, showing an 
increased share of applicants receiving fee waivers. See 81 FR 73298. 
In addition, the FY 2016/2017 fee rule removed the difference in fees 
between forms filed for biological children versus forms filed for 
adopted children. See 81 FR 73297-73298. In response to the FY 2016/
2017 fee rule NPRM, some commenters stated that the proposed fee 
increases would result in a significant additional burden for 
applicants, including adoptive families. Nevertheless, DHS increased 
the fees to recover the cost of adjudications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \238\ Compare Forms N-600 and N-600K between Tables 10 and 11 in 
the 2010 proposed rule. See 75 FR 33468-33469 (June 11, 2010). The 
2010 proposed rule assumed no fee waivers for Forms N-600 and N-600K 
because workload volumes are equal to fee-paying volumes for the two 
respective forms. The 2010 final rule adopted the proposed fees for 
Forms N-600 and N-600K. See 75 FR 58964 (Sept. 24, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the 2020 fee rule, fees for Forms N-600 and N-600K decreased. 
See 85 FR 46792. However, that fee decrease was the result of 
limitations on fee waivers that were included in that enjoined rule. 
See 85 FR 46861. DHS is not proposing to similarly restrict fee waivers 
in this rule. Therefore, fee waivers continue to contribute to the 
proposed fee increases. Recent USCIS data indicate that approximately 
53 percent of Form N-600 applicants and approximately 74 percent of 
Form N-600K applicants pay the respective fees, and the fees

[[Page 489]]

proposed in this rule reflect that.\239\ This means that every fee-
paying Form N-600 applicant would need to pay almost double the 
estimated unit cost of the application in order to accommodate 
applicants that received a fee waiver or qualified for a fee exemption 
for Form N-600 if the burden were limited to Form N-600 filers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \239\ See Section V.B.1 earlier in this NPRM. Compare the 
workload to the fee-paying volume for Forms N-600 and N-600K. Divide 
the fee-paying receipts by the workload for the fee-paying 
percentage. For example, Form N-600 estimated workload is 30,000. 
The estimated fee-paying volume is 16,041. Estimated fee-paying 
divided by estimated workload equals 53.47 percent as the fee-paying 
percentage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The current fees represent a combined fee for both Forms N-600 and 
N-600K.\240\ The proposed fees for Forms N-600 and N-600K are 
calculated and proposed separately. USCIS estimated separate workload 
and fee-paying volumes for each in this proposed rule. By determining 
separate volumes and fee-paying percentages for Forms N-600 and N-600K, 
these proposed fees better reflect the fee-paying percentage of each 
respective benefit request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \240\ See 103.7(b)(1)(i)(EEE) and (FFF) (Oct. 1, 2020). Both 
used the same $1,070 fee; see also 81 FR 73295 (Oct. 24, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS recognizes that increasing fees for Forms N-600 and N-600K to 
account for the full cost of adjudication may adversely impact 
applicants who are generally children and are already citizens by law. 
DHS has determined that the combined effect of high cost and low fee-
paying volume would otherwise place an inordinate fee burden on 
individuals requesting certificates of citizenship. Also, DHS has 
decided that limiting the fee increase will promote citizenship and 
immigrant integration.
    Therefore, DHS proposes to limit the increase of the fee for these 
forms and apply the cost reallocation methodology as described in 
section VIII.F.5., Proposed Changes to Other Naturalization-Related 
Application Fees. This proposed fee remains below the estimated cost 
from the USCIS ABC model. By limiting the fee increase, DHS may reduce 
the financial burden on these applicants. In addition, limiting the N-
600 fees does not appreciably increase other fees by shifting an 
inordinate amount of costs of adjudicating the N-600 to them. The 
increase to other forms is only $5 in many cases, compared to an 
increase of hundreds of dollars to the N-600 and N-600K fees to recover 
full cost. For example, if DHS proposed to recover full cost on Form N-
600 and N-600K, then proposed fees for Form N-600 would range from 
$1,835 when filed online to $2,080 when filed on paper. These 
hypothetical proposed fees are $450 and $695 more than the respective 
proposed fees in this rulemaking. Thus, DHS concludes that the proposed 
Form N-600 and N-600K fees represent a reasonable balance between the 
beneficiary-pays and ability-to-pay fee-setting models being employed 
to calculate the fees in this proposed rule.
5. Proposed Changes to Other Naturalization-Related Application Fees
    There are other naturalization and citizenship related forms that 
may be submitted in coordination with the naturalization or certificate 
of citizenship application. Other forms may be submitted before or 
after such applications for other benefits. In some cases, such as Form 
N-565, DHS proposes to recover full cost; however, proposed fees for 
most naturalization services remain below estimated cost. See Table 14.
    DHS uses its fee setting discretion to adjust certain immigration 
request fees that would be overly burdensome on applicants, 
petitioners, and requestors. Historically, as a matter of policy, DHS 
has chosen to limit USCIS fee adjustments for certain benefit requests 
to the weighted average fee increase represented by the model output 
costs for fee-paying benefit types. See 75 FR 33461.\241\ Any 
additional costs from these benefit request types beyond this 
calculated weighted average increase figure would be reallocated to 
other benefit types.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \241\ See also FY 2008/2009 Fee Rule. 72 FR 4910.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS has continuously limited the fees for the following forms:
     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); and
     Form N-470, Application to Preserve Residence for 
Naturalization Purposes.
    DHS recognizes that charging less than the full cost of 
adjudicating an immigration benefit request requires USCIS to increase 
fees for other immigration benefit requests to ensure full cost 
recovery.\242\ Nevertheless, DHS proposes to continue limiting the fees 
for these forms as they are related to naturalization benefits and some 
have low receipt numbers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \242\ This complies with INA sec. 286(m), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m), 
which authorizes DHS to set USCIS fees at a level required to cover 
the costs of providing applicants, petitioners, or requestors a 
service or part of a service ``without charge.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS further proposes to maintain the current fee for Form N-565, 
Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document despite 
the FY 2022/2023 USCIS ABC model calculating a lower fee for it. The 
current fee for Form N-565 is $555. There is no fee when this 
application is submitted under 8 CFR 338.5(a) or 343a.1 to request 
correction of a certificate that contains an error. DHS considered 
lowering the fee as provided in the model, but decided that the revenue 
above the costs of adjudicating that would be generated by maintaining 
the current N-565 fee would help to mitigate the fee increases for 
other forms.\243\ DHS weighed a number of factors in deciding to keep 
the current fee, which is $180 higher than the FY 2022/2023 fee-paying 
unit cost. See Table 14. DHS recognizes that obtaining a replacement 
Naturalization/Citizenship Document may be necessary at times; however, 
a U.S. passport is an available alternative to proof of U.S. 
citizenship. The number of individuals who would file Form N-565 is 
limited, a fee waiver is still available, and the fee is not increasing 
from the FY 2016/2017 fee rule. Therefore, DHS determined that keeping 
the fee at the amount that it has been for the last 5 years would not 
be unduly burdensome on applicants or limit access to a replacement 
certificate. Thus, DHS decided that applicants for a replacement 
naturalization/citizenship document would pay the current fee although 
the amount is above the fee-paying unit cost calculated by the ABC 
model.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \243\ See section V.B.3. of this preamble for more information 
on assessing proposed fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. Request for Comments
    While DHS proposes no changes to the Request for Reduced Fee (Form 
I-942) income threshold for the naturalization application, DHS 
specifically requests comments on the appropriate level of income that 
USCIS should use to determine eligibility for the reduced fee and data 
to support that suggested level or measure. DHS also requests comments 
on limiting the increase of some fees and applying the cost 
reallocation methodology.

G. Fees for Online Filing

    The June 2018 OMB report, ``Delivering Government Solutions in the 
21st Century,'' recognized that an overarching source of Government 
inefficiency is the outdated reliance on paper-based processes, and 
prioritized the transition of Federal agencies' business processes and 
recordkeeping to a fully electronic environment.\244\ The

[[Page 490]]

report noted that Federal agencies collectively spend billions of 
dollars on paper management, including processing, moving, and 
maintaining large volumes of paper records, and highlighted the key 
importance of data, accountability, and transparency.\245\ 
Significantly, it cites USCIS' electronic processing efforts as an 
example of an agency initiative that aligns with the prioritized 
reforms.\246\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \244\ OMB, ``Delivering Government Solutions in the 21st 
Century: Reform Plan and Reorganization Recommendations'' (2018), 
available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Government-Reform-and-Reorg-Plan.pdf.
    \245\ Id. at 100.
    \246\ Id. at 101-02.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FY 2022 President's Budget also noted the need for effective, 
efficient, and modern Federal information technology to improve service 
delivery.\247\ USCIS will continue to expand upon the current level of 
operational digital filing platforms and encourage filers to utilize 
these online resources for a simpler, faster, and more responsive 
filing experience.\248\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \247\ OMB, ``Budget of the U.S. Government: Fiscal Year 2022'' 
(2021), available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/budget_fy22.pdf.
    \248\ OMB, ``12. Information Technology and Cybersecurity 
Funding'' (2021), available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/ap_12_it_fy22.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS understands that while USCIS has embraced technology in 
adjudication and recordkeeping, it remains bound to the significant 
administrative and operational burdens associated with benefit requests 
that are submitted on paper. The intake, storage, and handling of paper 
require tremendous operational resources, and information recorded on 
paper cannot be as effectively standardized or used for fraud and 
national security, information sharing, and system integration 
purposes. However, technological advances have allowed USCIS to develop 
accessible, digital alternatives to traditional paper methods for 
intaking and adjudicating benefit requests. Every benefit request 
submitted online instead of on paper provides direct and immediate cost 
savings and operational efficiencies to both USCIS and filers--benefits 
that will increase throughout an individual's immigration lifecycle as 
more benefit requests become available for online filing and case 
management.
    Even as benefit requests become available for online filing, USCIS 
continues to provide the option of engaging with USCIS on paper. DHS 
recognizes that people adopt new technology at varying rates and have 
different levels of access to technology resources.\249\ In this case, 
the complexity of the immigration benefit request system may exacerbate 
the tendency toward the status quo. Those familiar with paper-based 
forms and interactions may feel there is no reason to change a method 
that has worked for them in the past.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \249\ See Brian Kennedy & Cary Funk, Pew Research Group, ``28 
percent of Americans are `strong' early adopters of technology'' 
(July 12, 2016), available at http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/07/12/28-of-americans-are-strong-early-adopters-of-technology. 
See also Emily Vowels, Pew Research Group, ``Digital divide persists 
even as Americans with lower incomes make gains in tech adoption'' 
(June 22, 2021), available at https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/06/22/digital-divide-persists-even-as-americans-with-lower-incomes-make-gains-in-tech-adoption/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS agrees that transitioning to online filing for benefit requests 
is an important step in improving USCIS service and financial 
stewardship while promoting the objectives of the Government Paperwork 
Elimination Act \250\ and the E-Government Act.\251\ Therefore, USCIS 
has calculated the fee-paying unit cost (model output) for paper filing 
and online filing separately. USCIS modified its ABC model to 
distinguish between paper and online filing costs when both options 
exist for an immigration benefit request.\252\ USCIS used domestic 
receipt data from April 2020 to March 2021 to estimate the percentage 
of receipts by filing method (online or paper) for each type of 
immigration benefit request available for online filing. USCIS applied 
those percentages to the total receipt forecasts by fiscal year to 
estimate online and paper filing volumes for immigration benefit 
requests for which both filing options are available.\253\ The ABC 
model assigned costs differently to the two filing methods. For 
example, the model assigned the Intake activity to only paper 
workloads. The Intake activity represents mailroom operations, data 
entry and collection, file assembly, fee receipting, adjudication of 
fee waiver requests, and lockbox operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \250\ See Pub. L. 105-227, 112 Stat. 2681 (Oct. 21, 1998).
    \251\ See Pub. L. 107-347, 116 Stat. 2899 (Dec. 17, 2002).
    \252\ USCIS uses commercially available ABC software, 
CostPerform, to create financial models to implement ABC, as 
described in the Methodology section of this preamble and the 
supporting documentation in the docket for this proposed rule. The 
supporting documentation also provides additional information on 
activities and their assignments in the ABC model.
    \253\ USCIS did not use online filing data for Form I-765 during 
this timeframe. Online filing for certain applicants filing Form I-
765 became available on April 12, 2021. See USCIS, ``F-1 Students 
Seeking Optional Practical Training Can Now File Form I-765 
Online,'' available at https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/f-1-students-seeking-optional-practical-training-can-now-file-form-i-765-online (last revised Apr. 12, 2021). USCIS used the online 
filing rates for Form I-539 as a proxy for the online filing rates 
for the eligible categories of I-765 filers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS recognizes that the international COVID-19 pandemic may have 
increased the level of online filing versus paper filing for benefit 
requests where online filing is available. To encourage continued use 
of online filing at the same or a higher rate after the pandemic, DHS 
proposes a lower fee for online filing of immigration benefit requests 
for which both paper and online filing options are available.\254\ See 
proposed 8 CFR 106.2.\255\ See Table 15, Fees for Online Filing, for a 
comparison of paper and online filing fees. In some cases, DHS proposes 
to not change the fee. See section V.B.3., Assessing Proposed Fees, for 
more information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \254\ DHS codified a fee for forms currently available for 
online filing with USCIS and filed online that was $10 lower than 
the fee for the same paper. 8 CFR 106.2(d) (Oct. 2, 2020). In this 
rule, DHS also proposes separate fees for filing forms online.
    \255\ CBP accepts USCIS Forms I-192 and I-212 online. Available 
at https://www.cbp.gov/travel/international-visitors/e-safe (last 
modified Oct. 28, 2020). However, USCIS has no data on the cost of 
online filing with CBP. Therefore, DHS proposes that USCIS online 
and paper fees apply to USCIS forms submitted to USCIS only.

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

[[Page 491]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.053

    DHS bases the proposed separate online and paper fees on ABC model 
results. When DHS proposes limited fee increases or to continue using 
the current fee, the calculation is based on the current fee instead of 
ABC model results. As such, there are not separate proposed fees for 
online and paper filing for immigration benefit requests with limited 
fee increases or held to the current fee.
    USCIS will further evaluate the effects of these changes in future 
biennial fee reviews. For example, if the level of online filing 
increases or as more benefit requests become available for online 
filing, then USCIS will incorporate that information into future fee 
reviews.

H. Form I-485, Application To Register Permanent Residence or Adjust 
Status

1. Interim Benefits
    Usually, a primary immigration benefit request must be approved 
before an applicant can receive associated benefits such as employment 
authorization or a travel document or both. That is, USCIS only grants 
associated benefits after or at the same time as it grants the primary 
immigration benefit request. However, in some situations, an applicant 
may qualify for an associated immigration benefit while the primary 
benefit request is still pending adjudication. For example, in certain 
instances, a person with a pending adjustment of status application may 
apply for employment authorization or a travel document or both. See 8 
CFR 274a.12(c)(9). When associated benefits are issued while a primary 
benefit request is pending, USCIS refers to them as ``interim'' 
benefits.
    DHS proposes to require separate filing fees for Form I-765, 
Application for Employment Authorization, and Form I-131, Application 
for Travel Document, when filed concurrently with Form I-485, 
Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, or as 
interim benefit requests on the basis of a pending Form I-485 filed on 
or after the effective date of this rule.
    Before the FY 2008/2009 fee rule, applicants paid separate fees for 
Form I-765 and Form I-131 while waiting for USCIS to adjudicate Form I-
485. Applicants who had not yet received a permanent residence card 
(PRC, also known as a ``Green Card'' or Form I-551), but who 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 applicants who properly file and pay the required fee for Form 
I-485 to file Forms I-765 and I-131 without paying the fees for those 
forms. Form I-765 or Form I-131, or both, may be filed concurrently 
with Form I-485 or as standalone interim benefit requests while Form I-
485 is still pending. Applicants who have not yet received a PRC but 
who have to renew these interim benefits also do not have to pay the 
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 29861-29862. 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 
Form I-485 more slowly. See 72 FR 4894 and 72 FR 29861-29862 (May 30, 
2007). 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 calculated the workload 
volume and fee-paying percentage for Forms I-

[[Page 492]]

765 and I-131 that were not associated with a Form I-485. This enabled 
USCIS to derive a fee-paying percentage for Forms I-765 and I-131 not 
filed concurrently with a Form I-485. See 81 FR 26918 (May 4, 2016) and 
81 FR 73300. By isolating standalone Form I-765 and Form I-131 interim 
benefit applications from those filed concurrently with Form I-485, 
USCIS more accurately assessed fee-paying percentages, fee-paying 
volumes, and fees for all three benefit types. Id.
    DHS proposes to charge separate fees for Form I-765 and Form I-131 
when filed concurrently with Form I-485 or as interim benefit requests 
while Form I-485 is pending adjudication. See proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(16); 8 CFR 106.2(a)(32); 8 CFR 106.2(a)(7)(iii).\256\ 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 change proposed in this 
rule takes effect will continue to be able to file Form I-765 and Form 
I-131 without additional fees while their Form I-485 is pending and 
would, therefore, be unaffected by this change. Individuals who filed 
Form I-485 before the FY 2008/2009 fee rule and those who file Form I-
485 on or after the date the proposed change becomes effective would 
pay separate fees for the interim benefits. The proposed changes are 
summarized in Table 16. The date the proposed changes would take effect 
is not yet available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \256\ In the 2020 fee rule, DHS required 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. DHS is not proposing to reverse that change and is 
proposing it again in this rule for the reasons stated.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.054

    DHS proposes this change to reduce the proposed fee increases for 
Form I-485 and other forms. For example, in the FY 2016/2017 fee rule, 
USCIS isolated the workload volume and fee-paying 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 USCIS 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). USCIS expects 
approximately 500,000 new fee-paying annual interim benefit 
applications in the FY 2022/2023 forecast as a result of the proposed 
change.
    In the proposed fee schedule, USCIS assumes these interim benefit 
applicants will pay the applicable fees for Forms I-485, I-765, and I-
131. If applicants continued to only pay a bundled fee, then the 
proposed fee for Form I-485 would be $1,715, which is $175 or 
approximately 37 percent more than the actual proposed fee of $1,540. 
See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(U) (Oct. 1, 2020); proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(16). Other proposed fees would also change on this 
hypothetical fee schedule including Form I-765, Application for 
Employment Authorization. If USCIS continued to allow free interim 
benefits, the proposed Form I-765 fee would be $825 when filed on 
paper. This would be $415 or approximately 101 percent more than the 
current $410 fee. By proposing that Form I-765 require the fee when 
filing as an interim benefit, the proposed Form I-765 fee is $650, 
which is $240 or approximately 59 percent more than the current $410 
fee. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(II) (Oct. 1, 2020); proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(43)(ii). By having one fee for Form I-485 and interim 
benefits, the weighted average fee increase would be 51-percent 
compared to the 40-percent average fee increase in the proposed fee 
schedule.\257\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \257\ USCIS uses a weighted average instead of a straight 
average because of the difference in volume by immigration benefit 
type and the resulting effect on fee revenue. In a fee schedule with 
free interim benefits, the sum of the current fees multiplied by the 
projected FY 2022/2023 fee-paying receipts for each immigration 
benefit type, divided by the total fee-paying receipts is $522. This 
is $4 higher than in the proposed fee schedule because the fee-
paying volumes are lower when DHS assumes free interim benefits. The 
weighted average proposed fee is $790, $65 or approximately 16 
percent higher than the weighted average current fee of $522 in this 
hypothetical fee schedule that assumes free interim benefits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a bundled scenarios, USCIS only counts Form I-485 as a fee-
paying receipt. In a scenario without bundled interim benefits, USCIS 
may count Forms I-485, I-765, and I-131 each as up to three fee-paying 
receipts. In general, fees are higher in a fee schedule with bundled 
fee interim benefits because it has lower fee-paying volumes than the 
proposed fee schedule. This means there are fewer immigration benefit 
requests from which USCIS can recover projected costs in a fee schedule 
with bundled fee interim benefits. For example, USCIS estimates that 
approximately 65 percent of Form I-765 applicants may pay the Form I-
765 fee in a scenario without bundled interim benefits; this is the 
proposed fee scenario with higher fee-paying volumes overall. In a 
bundled scenario, approximately 45 percent of Form I-765 applicants may 
pay the fee for Form I-765. While Form I-485 applicants would not have 
to pay the fee for Form I-765 in a bunded scenario, the fee for all 
other Form I-765 applicants would be higher because a bundled scenario 
reduces fee-paying receipts overall. In the bundled scenario, people 
would pay more to recover the cost of Form I-765 because of the 
approximate 20 percent difference between the two scenarios. These 
points of comparison ignore additional fee exemptions that are also 
part of the proposed fees. Put another way, if USCIS performs less 
bundled work, then applicants pay lower fees for that work because it 
will increase fee-paying volumes for Forms I-485, I-765, and I-131. If 
USCIS continues to offer bundled interim benefits, then other 
immigration benefit request fees will be higher. DHS proposes separate 
fees for interim benefit applications and Form I-485 applications in 
order to lower the proposed fees for most other applicants, 
petitioners, and requestors, and to tailor applicants' costs more 
directly to the benefits for which they apply.

[[Page 493]]

    DHS proposes to increase the Form I-485 fee to $1,540, which is 
$400 or 35 percent more than the current $1,140 fee that includes 
interim benefits. USCIS did not realize the efficiency gains 
anticipated when it originally bundled interim benefits in the FY 2008/
2009 fee rule. 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, known as 
retrogression. Some Form I-485 applicants must wait years for visas to 
become available again after they file their adjustment of status 
applications.\258\ 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 DOS'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, as of June 9, 
2021, provides EADs with 2-year rather than 1-year validity periods to 
decrease the burden on both the Department and applicants caused by 
long waits for visa availability.\259\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \258\ See USCIS, ``Visa Retrogression,'' available at https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-processes-and-procedures/visa-availability-priority-dates/visa-retrogression (last updated Mar. 8, 
2018).
    \259\ See USCIS, ``USCIS Policy Manual'' (Vol. 10), Employment 
Authorization, Part B, Specific Categories, Chapter 4, Adjustment 
Applicants Under INA sec. 245, Policies to Improve Immigration 
Services at https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/policy-manual-updates/20210609-EmploymentAuthorization.pdf (last 
updated June 9, 2021). 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of this proposal, new Form I-485 applicants would only 
pay for the benefits that they request. 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, which was 
a consequence of the bundled fee approach. See 72 FR 29861-29863 (May 
30, 2007) and 75 FR 58968. In previous fee rules, bundled interim 
benefit fees were only associated with a pending Form I-485. However, 
other applications may also warrant interim benefits.\260\ DHS has 
decided it is more equitable to treat all petitioners and applicants 
who apply for interim benefits the same, regardless of the pending 
primary request that may grant interim benefits, even though some 
applicants would pay significantly more to adjust status and apply for 
one or more interim benefits. If USCIS continues offering bundled 
interim benefits, then other customers may bear the burden of higher 
fees as a result of bundled interim benefits that do not benefit them. 
For example, DHS believes it would present unfair barriers for 
unrelated applicants with limited financial resources (like asylum 
renewals or students) for Form I-765 to pay higher fees so that Form I-
485 applicants would pay lower fees. Table 17 compares the current fees 
for Form I-485 applicants that may bundle interim benefits to the 
proposed fees without bundling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \260\ 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.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.055

    DHS acknowledges that applicants and petitioners may face 
additional difficulties in paying the proposed fees, and may be 
required to request a fee waiver if eligible, save money longer to 
afford the fees, or resort to credit cards or borrowing to pursue their 
or their family members' immigration benefit. DHS has weighed these 
impacts and interests and considered alternatives to the proposals in 
this rule as described in this preamble. DHS is committed to 
affordability and access for all and acknowledges that the increase in 
some fees may appear contrary to this commitment. As discussed above, 
however, bundled interim benefits are currently making other 
immigration

[[Page 494]]

benefits less affordable. DHS requests comments on the proposed change 
to Form I-485 and interim benefits.
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) (Oct. 1, 2020). DHS 
proposes to require payment of the proposed $1,540 fee for all 
applicants, including children under the age of 14 years concurrently 
filing Form I-485 with a parent.\261\ See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(U)(2) 
(Oct. 1, 2020); proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(16).\262\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \261\ The parent may be seeking classification as an immediate 
relative of a U.S. citizen, a family-sponsored 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).
    \262\ DHS made this change in the 2020 fee rule and is proposing 
that it not be reversed for the reasons stated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS no longer believes there is a cost basis for the two different 
Form I-485 fees. As explained in the FY 2016/2017 fee rule, USCIS does 
not track the adjudication time for Form I-485 based on the age of the 
applicant, so there are 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 
for most adults. However, because DHS proposes to charge separate fees 
for interim benefits, there are no longer any Form I-765 adjudication 
costs included in the calculation of the fee, meaning that the previous 
rationale for providing a discount no longer exists. However, children 
under the age of 14 do not typically pay the $85 biometric services fee 
required for adults that apply to adjust status, which this rule 
proposes to bundle into the fee for Form I-485.
    In the proposed Form I-485 fee, USCIS assumes the same completion 
rate and biometric services for adults and children to reflect USCIS 
data and processes, and 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 
2019 and FY 2020, approximately five to six percent of Form I-485 
applicants paid the $750 fee. See Table 18 for Form I-485 fee-paying 
receipts and percentages for the 2 years.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.056

3. INA Sec. 245(i) Statutory Sum
    In addition, DHS is proposing to clarify the statutory sum for 
applicants for adjustment of status under INA sec. 245(i).\263\ Such 
applicants are required to properly file Form I-485 with fee along with 
Form I-485 Supplement A and the $1,000 statutory sum, unless exempted 
by the statute. USCIS proposes that the statutory sum for Form I-485 
Supplement A, Adjustment of Status Under Section 245(i), be revised to 
clarify that Form I-485 Supplement A and the $1,000 statutory sum must 
be submitted when Form I-485 is filed or still pending. See proposed 8 
CFR 106.2(a)(21). DHS is also proposing to remove the additional 
reference from the Form I-485 Supplement A that states there is no 
required statutory sum 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) (Oct. 1, 2020); proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(17). Those 
exemptions from the required statutory sum are explicitly provided by 
statute and will be included in the applicable form instructions. See 
INA sec. 245(i)(1)(C), 8 U.S.C. 1255(i)(1)(C). Therefore, it is 
unnecessary to codify them in the CFR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \263\ The additional $1,000 sum is required to be submitted with 
each INA sec. 245(i), 8 U.S.C. 1255(i), adjustment of status 
application, unless the applicant is (1) an unmarried child under 
age 17, or (2) the spouse or unmarried child of a legalized alien 
who satisfies the requirements for an exemption in 8 CFR 245.10(c).

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

[[Page 495]]

I. Continuing To Hold Refugee Travel Document Fee for Asylees 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,\264\ DHS proposes to 
continue to link the fee charged for Form I-131, Application for Travel 
Document, to the DOS's fee for a first time United States passport book 
when Form I-131 is filed by asylees, or by LPRs who obtained such 
status as asylees, to request a refugee travel document.\265\ In 
previous fee rules, DHS aligned the refugee travel document fees to the 
sum of the U.S. 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, which is a $10 or 40 percent 
increase. See DOS, ``Schedule of Fees for Consular Services, Department 
of State and Overseas Embassies and Consulates--Passport Services Fee 
Changes,'' 83 FR 4425 (Jan. 31, 2018). In addition, DOS increased the 
passport book security surcharge from $60 to $80, a $20 or 33 percent 
increase. See DOS, ``Schedule of Fees for Consular Services-Passport 
Security Surcharge,'' 86 FR 59613 (Oct. 27, 2021). Together, these two 
DOS rules represent a $30 increase in passport book fees since DHS last 
changed the refugee travel document fees. Under this proposal, DHS 
would increase refugee travel document fees by a conforming amount for 
asylees and LPRs who obtained such status as asylees. DHS refugee 
travel document fees for this population would be $165 for adults and 
$135 for children under the age of 16 years, consistent with U.S. 
passport fees. See proposed revised and republished 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(7)(i) and (ii). As discussed in section VII.B.12. of this 
preamble, DHS proposes to exempt refugees from paying the fee for 
refugee travel documents. DHS estimates that the cost to USCIS of 
processing refugee travel documents exceeds the fee for a U.S. passport 
book. Consistent with past and current practice, DHS proposes to set 
other fees marginally higher to recover the difference between the cost 
of adjudicating Form I-131 for refugee travel documents and the revenue 
generated from the fees in light of the considerations and policy 
reasons described above relating to refugees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \264\ 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 34 of the Convention as to persons 
who had become refugees because of events taking place after January 
1, 1951.'').
    \265\ See 75 FR 58972 (Sept. 24, 2010) (discussing Article 28 
standards for assessing charges for a refugee travel document).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. 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 maintain the 
current Form I-131A fee. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(M)(3) (Oct. 1, 2020); 
proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(8). The proposed fee for Form I-131A is the 
same as the current $575 fee. Id. USCIS began using Form I-131A, 
Application for Carrier Documentation, in 2016. See 80 FR 59805 (Oct. 
2, 2015). 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 
73294-73295.
    Currently, certain LPRs may use Form I-131A to apply for a travel 
document (carrier documentation) if their PRC, also known as a ``Green 
Card'' or Form I-551, or their re-entry permit is lost, stolen, or 
destroyed while outside of the United States. Carrier documentation 
allows an airline or other transportation carrier to board the LPR 
without any penalty for permitting an individual to board without a 
visa or travel document. See INA sec. 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 1 year, and an LPR who was traveling on a re-entry permit must 
have been outside the United States for less than 2 years. Form I-131A 
is not an application for a replacement PRC or re-entry permit.
    DHS proposes that the fee for Form I-131A does not change. While 
the result of the ABC model indicated that the fee should decrease, 
Form I-131A requires a different adjudicative process than Form I-131, 
including processing by DOS 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 most USCIS 
international offices.\266\ The proposed fee includes direct costs to 
account for the fee DOS charges USCIS to adjudicate Form I-131A 
applications, which is approximately $337 per application.\267\ In the 
FY 2020 interagency agreement and in this proposed rule, USCIS projects 
that DOS will receive approximately 8,000 Forms I-131A each year. In 
addition, the proposed fee includes a portion of the cost of RAIO 
staff. Among other duties, RAIO oversees the interagency agreement with 
the DOS. USCIS may also process some Form I-131A requests at the 
remaining offices abroad. However, USCIS is uncertain how many. USCIS 
is unable to estimate a workload forecast because the COVID-19 pandemic 
forced the remaining USCIS locations abroad to close to the public 
shortly after the reorganization. In light of this uncertainty, DHS 
decided to maintain the current fee to generate more revenue. DHS will 
reassess the fee in future fee reviews.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \266\ See USCIS, ``USCIS Will Adjust International Footprint to 
Seven Locations,'' available at https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/uscis-will-adjust-international-footprint-seven-locations 
(last updated Aug. 9, 2019).
    \267\ The FY 2020 interagency agreement between DOS and USCIS 
uses an Economy Act rate of $313.11 for the adjudication. 
Additionally, State charges a $23.82 cashiering fee for each Form I-
131A. USCIS used FY 2020 rates when calculating the proposed fees. 
The total of these two fees is $336.93.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

K. Separating Fees for Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, 
by Nonimmigrant Classification

    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 submit 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.\268\ Using this single 
form, petitioners or applicants can file petitions or applications for 
many different types of nonimmigrant workers.\269\ Some classifications 
also

[[Page 496]]

allow nonimmigrants to ``self-petition'' or file a petition or 
application on their own behalf. 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. In some 
cases, certain petitioners or applicants must pay statutory fees in 
addition to a base filing fee. For example, several statutory fees 
exist for H and L nonimmigrant workers.\270\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \268\ See USCIS, ``Temporary (Nonimmigrant) Workers,'' available 
at https://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/temporary-nonimmigrant-workers (last updated Sept. 7, 2011). See also 8 CFR 
214.2(h)(2)(i)(A) (Oct. 1, 2020) (stating that ``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 Form I-129, Petition for 
Nonimmigrant Worker, as provided in the form instructions.'').
    \269\ 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 updated April 23, 2021).
    \270\ 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,'' available at https://www.uscis.gov/forms/h-and-l-filing-fees-form-i-129-petition-nonimmigrant-worker (last updated/reviewed 
Feb. 2, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the 2020 fee rule, DHS separated Form I-129 into the following 
forms: Form I-129E&TN, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: E and TN 
Classifications; Form I-129H1, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H-1 
Classifications; Form I-129H2A, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H-2A 
Classification; Form I-129H2B, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H-2B 
Classification; Form I-129L, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: L 
Classifications; Form I-129O, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: O 
Classifications; and Form I-129MISC, Petition for Nonimmigration 
Worker: H-3, P, Q, or R Classifications. 8 CFR 106.2(a)(3) (Oct. 2, 
2020). DHS and USCIS believed that splitting the form and proposing 
several different fees would simplify or consolidate the information 
requirements for petitioners and applicants as well as better reflect 
the cost to adjudicate each specific nonimmigrant classification. 84 FR 
62307.
    In the 2020 fee rule, DHS also limited the number of multiple 
beneficiaries that could be requested on a single petition for 
nonimmigrant worker, provided a different fee for petitions for up to 
25 named beneficiaries versus petitions for more than 25 named 
beneficiaries, and required that if a petition includes more than 25 
beneficiaries, an additional petition is required. 8 CFR 
214.2(h)(2)(ii) (Oct. 2, 2020). DHS estimated 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 it cannot do so for unnamed workers. After a petition for unnamed 
workers is approved, the petitioner finds workers and then the workers 
apply for nonimmigrant visas with DOS, who will then vet the worker 
before adjudicating the visa application. Therefore, USCIS believes 
that it takes less time for USCIS immigration services officers to 
adjudicate a petition with unnamed workers. 84 FR 62309.
    In this rule, DHS proposes different fees for Form I-129 based on 
the nonimmigrant classification being requested in the petition, the 
number of beneficiaries on the petition, and, in some cases, according 
to whether the petition includes named or unnamed beneficiaries. 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) (Oct. 1, 2020). 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. In order to reflect these differences, 
DHS is proposing a range of fees for petitions and applications for 
nonimmigrant workers, listed in Table 19 and explained in the 
subsequent sections. USCIS believes the proposed different fees will 
better reflect the cost to adjudicate each specific nonimmigrant 
classification.
    In 2017, the DHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) released a 
report on H-1B visa participants.\271\ 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 petitioners for 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. Based on FY 
2020 spending, USCIS estimates that it may spend $8.4 million for ASVVP 
payroll in the FY 2022/2023 fee review budget. Additionally, USCIS 
tracks ASVVP hours by form type in the FDNS Data System, which USCIS 
uses to identify fraud and track potential patterns. In the FY 2022/
2023 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 costs of site visits to Forms 
I-129, I-360, and I-829. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \271\ DHS OIG, USCIS Needs a Better Approach to Verify H-1B Visa 
Participants (Oct. 20, 2017), https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2017/OIG-18-03-Oct17.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 
V.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.
BILLING CODE 9111-97-P

[[Page 497]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.057

BILLING CODE 9111-97-C
1. Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H-1 Classification
    The H-1B nonimmigrant program is for individuals who will perform 
services in a specialty occupation, services relating to a Department 
of Defense cooperative research and development project or coproduction 
project, or services as a fashion model who is of distinguished merit 
and 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) and (a)(15)(H)(i)(b1); 8 U.S.C. 
1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) and (a)(15)(H)(i)(b1).\272\ DHS proposes a fee of 
$780 for Form I-129 petitions when filed for H-1B and H-1B1 
nonimmigrant classifications. The proposed fee 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 where it does not 
have the authority to change the amount of these fees.\273\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \272\ See USCIS, ``H-1B Specialty Occupations, DOD Cooperative 
Research and Development Project Workers, and Fashion Models,'' 
available at https://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/temporary-workers/h-1b-specialty-occupations-dod-cooperative-research-and-development-project-workers-and-fashion-models (last updated Feb. 5, 
2021).
    \273\ 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 five percent of the 
$1,500 or $750 American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement 
Act fee. The remainder goes to the Department of Labor (DOL) and the 
National Science Foundation. USCIS keeps one-third of the $500 Fraud 
Detection and Prevention fee, while the remainder is split between 
the DOS and the DOL. These statutory fees are in addition to the 
current Form I-129 fee of $460 and optional premium processing fee 
of $1,500 or $2,500. See USCIS, ``H and L Filing Fees for Form I-
129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker,'' available at https://www.uscis.gov/forms/h-and-l-filing-fees-form-i-129-petition-nonimmigrant-worker (last updated/reviewed Feb. 2, 2018). Premium 
processing fees are available at https://www.uscis.gov/i-907 (last 
updated Dec. 21, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Form I-129, Petitions for H-2A or H-2B Classifications
    The H-2A visa 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.\274\ The H-2B visa 
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.\275\ On March 6, 2017, the OIG 
issued an

[[Page 498]]

audit report after reviewing whether the fee structure associated with 
H-2 petitions is equitable and effective.\276\ OIG identified a number 
of issues and provided recommendations to address the issues. In 
response to OIG recommendations, USCIS proposes the following changes:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \274\ See USCIS, ``H-2A Temporary Agricultural Workers,'' 
available at https://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/temporary-workers/h-2a-temporary-agricultural-workers (last updated Jan. 12, 
2021).
    \275\ See USCIS, ``H-2B Temporary Non-Agricultural Workers,'' 
available at https://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/temporary-workers/h-2b-temporary-non-agricultural-workers (last updated Feb. 
2, 2021). 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)(13), 286(v); 
8 U.S.C. 1184(c)(13), 1356(v). This statutory fee is in addition to 
the current Form I-129 fee of $460 and optional premium processing 
fee of $1,500.
    \276\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Separate fees for petitions with named workers and 
petitions with unnamed workers;
     Limit the number of named workers that may be included 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 programs; or (2) the 
beneficiary is in the United States. See 8 CFR 214.2(h)(2)(iii) (Oct. 
1, 2020). 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. The 2020 fee rule relied on 
separate USCIS estimated hours per petition for named or unnamed 
beneficiaries. In FY 2021, USCIS began tracking Form I-129 adjudication 
hours by petitions for named or unnamed beneficiaries. This proposal is 
based on those hours for the first 6 months of FY 2021, which was the 
most recent available at the time of the FY 2022/2023 fee review. USCIS 
data indicate that it takes less time for a 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.\277\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \277\ Id. at 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OIG's interviews of USCIS immigration services officers indicated 
that a maximum of 10 nonimmigrant workers could usually be processed 
within a normal workday.\278\ DHS estimates the proposed change will 
increase H-2A and H-2B petition filing volume by approximately 1,800 
after comparing our H-2A and H-2B petition forecasts for FY 2022/2023 
with or without the proposed change. DHS assumes 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \278\ Id. at 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed fees would address the imbalances in the current fee 
structure identified by the OIG audit. For example, the proposed $530 
fee for an H-2A petition without named workers is $560 less than the 
proposed $1,090 fee for an H-2A petition with named workers because the 
adjudication of petitions requesting unnamed workers requires less 
time.
3. Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: L Classification
    Under current requirements, petitioners sponsoring L nonimmigrant 
workers, who are intracompany transferees,\279\ may be required to 
submit additional statutory fees or other additional forms to USCIS 
along with Form I-129. For example, two statutory fees may apply for L 
nonimmigrant workers.\280\ Some petitions require the additional Form 
I-129S, Nonimmigrant Petition Based on Blanket L Petition. DHS is not 
proposing different fees for managers and executives, because the 
agency has no records on the difference in completion 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 within classifications, such as managers and 
executives. The $1,385 proposed fee is based partly on the average 
completion rate for L-1 petitions. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \279\ The L-1 intracompany transferee nonimmigrant 
classification permits a multinational organization to transfer 
certain employees from one of its foreign entities to one of its 
affiliated 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).
    \280\ 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 DOS and the DOL. 
These statutory fees are in addition to the current Form I-129 fee 
of $460 and optional premium processing fee of $2,500. See USCIS, 
``H and L Filing Fees for Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant 
Worker,'' available at https://www.uscis.gov/forms/h-and-l-filing-fees-form-i-129-petition-nonimmigrant-worker (last updated Feb. 2, 
2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: O Classification
    DHS proposes a fee of $1,055 for Form I-129 petitions filed to 
request O classifications. Similar to some other proposed changes to 
Form I-129, DHS proposes to limit each Form I-129 filed for O 
classifications to 25 named beneficiaries.\281\ Proposed and 
republished 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

[[Page 499]]

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 to petitioners filing 
petitions with low beneficiary counts of effectively subsidizing the 
cost of petitioners filing petitions with high beneficiary counts. 
USCIS currently captures adjudication hours for these types of 
petitions. As stated in section V.B.2., Completion Rates, the proposed 
fee is partly based on these data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \281\ 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: E and TN 
Classifications
    DHS proposes a fee of $1,015 for Form I-129 petitions filed for 
Treaty Trader (E-1), Treaty Investor (E-2), E-3, and TN 
classifications. 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 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 and republished 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 
originally created to implement part of the trilateral North American 
Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between Canada, Mexico, and the United 
States. NAFTA was replaced by the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). 
The USMCA entered into force on July 1, 2020. The USMCA did not make 
any changes to the Immigration chapter of NAFTA that have significance 
for this proposed rule. The USMCA retains all substantive elements of 
the former NAFTA, and the TN designation continues to be used for 
NAFTA/USMCA professionals.\282\ TN admissions under NAFTA were governed 
by the list of Professionals in Appendix 1603.D.1 to Annex 1603 of 
NAFTA. Under the USMCA, TN admissions are governed by the (identical) 
list of Professionals now found in USMCA Chapter 16 Appendix 2. For the 
purposes of discussing TN classification, this document uses the term 
``USMCA'' but applies to nonimmigrants under both the former ``NAFTA'' 
and ``USMCA'' interchangeably. In accordance with the USMCA, a citizen 
of Canada or Mexico who seeks temporary entry as a businessperson to 
engage in certain 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). USCIS does not have 
separate completion rates for the E and TN classifications. Currently, 
USCIS adjudicators report hours on these classifications in a catch-all 
Form I-129 category.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \282\ See United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement Implementation 
Act, Public Law 116-113 (2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker: H-3, P, Q, or R 
Classifications
    DHS proposes to create a fee of $1,015 for the remaining 
nonimmigrant worker classifications: H-3, P, Q, and R. See proposed 8 
CFR 106.2(a)(3)(viii). The costs used to determine the proposed fee for 
these classifications 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 
ASVVP.\283\ As previously discussed in sections 2 and 4, DHS proposes 
to limit petitions for H-3, P, Q, or R classifications that allow 1 
petition to be filed for multiple beneficiaries to 25 named 
beneficiaries. Proposed 8 CFR 214.2(h)(2)(ii), 8 CFR 
214.2(p)(2)(iv)(F), and 8 CFR 214.2(q)(5)(ii). As stated previously, 
this change 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 to 
petitioners filing petitions with low beneficiary counts of effectively 
subsidizing the cost of petitioners filing petitions with high 
beneficiary counts. USCIS does not have separate completion rates for 
the H-3, P, Q, or R classifications. Currently, USCIS adjudicators 
report hours on these classifications in a catch-all Form I-129 
category. As such, DHS lacks the information to propose separate fees 
for each of these classifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \283\ The estimated cost of ASVVP for this proposed fee is $69. 
See the Direct Costs column of Appendix Table 6 in the supporting 
documentation in the docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS proposes to republish a paragraph of regulatory text that 
incorporates statutory changes and longstanding practices that allow 
petitions for multiple P nonimmigrants. See proposed republished 8 CFR 
214.2(p)(2)(iv)(F). Specifically, DHS proposes and republishes a 
reference to ``team'' to account for INA sec. 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 one 
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. See id. and Public 
Law 109-463, 120 Stat. 3477 (2006). DHS also proposes to retain the 
revisions from the 2020 final fee rule as set out in proposed 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.
7. Separating Form I-129 Into Multiple Forms
    DHS is not separating Form I-129 into multiple forms in this rule 
as it did in the 2020 fee rule, but may take that action separately as 
a revision of the currently approved Form I-129 information collection 
under the PRA. See 86 FR 46260, 86 FR 46261, and 86 FR 46263 (August 
18, 2021). Although DHS separated Form I-129 into different forms in 
the 2020 fee rule, the form and its instructions can be revised in that 
same way using the procedures

[[Page 500]]

provided in 5 CFR part 1320 and obtaining approval from the OMB.\284\ 
As stated in section V.E.1 of this preamble, form numbers are included 
for informational purposes, but USCIS may collect fees for immigration 
benefit requests regardless of the assigned form number. If the Form I-
129 is separated into smaller forms with different names in the future, 
then the new, separate forms for nonimmigrant petitions will each have 
the same fee that is established for that nonimmigrant classification 
if this rule is final. Finally, as previously noted in the preamble, 
DHS proposes to remove references to ``Form I-129'' from 8 CFR. See 
e.g. 8 CFR 214.1 and 214.2 (Oct. 1, 2020); proposed 8 CFR 214.1 and 
214.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \284\ The Administrative Procedure Act excepts ``. . . rules of 
agency organization, procedure or practice.'' 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A); 
James v. Hurson Assocs., Inc. v. Glickman, 229 F.3d 277, 280 (D.C. 
Cir. 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

8. Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Fees
    DHS proposes to create a fee of $1,015 for Form I-129CW, Petition 
for a CNMI-Only Nonimmigrant Transitional Worker. See proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(4). Two recent public laws affected statutory fees for the 
CNMI. The Northern Mariana Islands Economic Expansion Act, Public Law 
115-53, section 2, 131 Stat. 1091, 1091 (2017) (2017 CNMI Act) 
increased the CNMI 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.\285\ 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) 
(Oct. 1, 2020); 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 the petition is 
filed. By statute, since the fee 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 1 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \285\ USCIS, ``New Legislation Increases Availability of Visas 
for CNMI Workers for Fiscal Year 2017,'' available at https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/new-legislation-increases-availability-visas-cnmi-workers-fiscal-year-2017 (last updated on 
Aug. 28, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS proposes a $10 adjustment to the $200 CNMI education funding 
fee based on the methodology described in the authorizing statute.\286\ 
Beginning in FY 2020, DHS may adjust the CNMI education funding fee 
once per year by notice in the Federal Register.\287\ The adjustment 
must be based on the annual change in the CPI-U published by the BLS. 
See proposed 8 CFR 106.2(c)(7)(iii). Therefore, the CNMI education 
funding fee would be $210 (rounded to the nearest $5 increment). 
Although the law provides DHS with explicit authority to adjust the fee 
for inflation based on the CPI-U, DHS includes this proposed increase 
along with other fees that USCIS collects. DHS took a similar approach 
when it first increased the premium processing fee in 2010. See 75 FR 
33477. The final rule will establish an amount based upon the latest 
published annual CPI-U before the final rule publication. DHS may 
revisit inflation increases to the CNMI education funding fee in future 
fee rules or separately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \286\ The unadjusted annual average CPI-U for 2019 was 255.657. 
See BLS, CPI for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) 1982-84=100 
(Unadjusted)--CUUR0000SA0, available at https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?bls (last visited Feb. 18, 2022). In 2021, it was 
270.97, a 15.313 or approximately a 5.99 percent increase. Id. The 
$200 fee adjusted for inflation is approximately $212, a $12 
increase. When rounded to the nearest $5, the inflation adjusted fee 
would be $210.
    \287\ Beginning in FY 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 (CPI-U) published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). 
48 U.S.C. 1806(a)(6)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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, 2018.\288\ The new fee is 
only due at the time of filing and 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 sec. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \288\ USCIS, ``New Law Extends CNMI CW-1 Program, Mandates New 
Fraud Fee, and Will Require E-Verify Participation,'' available at 
https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/new-law-extends-cnmi-cw-1-program-mandates-new-fraud-fee-and-will-require-e-verify-participation (last 
updated on Oct. 23, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 55513-55514 (Sept. 7, 2011). DHS proposes in 
this rule to continue to offer fee waivers for CNMI applicants filing 
Form I-129CW and Form I-539. See proposed 8 CFR 106.3. Currently, CNMI 
beneficiaries may pay a biometric services fee when seeking a grant or 
extension of CW-1 status in the CNMI. See 76 FR 55513-55514; 8 CFR 
214.2(e)(23)(viii) and (w)(16). As explained in section VIII.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 
beneficiary. See proposed 8 CFR 106.2, 214.2(v)(23)(viii) and (w)(16).
    DHS does not propose to limit the number of named beneficiaries 
included in a single I-129CW filing. USCIS does not have separate 
completion rates for CNMI petitions. Currently, USCIS adjudicators 
report hours for Form I-129CW in a catch-all Form I-129 category.
9. H-1B Electronic Registration Fee
    In 2019, DHS established a $10 registration fee per beneficiary for 
H-1B petitions. See ``Registration Fee Requirement for Petitioners 
Seeking To File H-1B Petitions on Behalf of Cap Subject Aliens,'' 84 FR 
60307 (Nov. 8, 2019). The $10 registration fee is separate from and in 
addition to the H-1B petition filing fee. See 84 FR 60309. USCIS 
requires the registration fee regardless of whether the potential 
petitioner's registration is selected. USCIS lacked sufficient data to 
precisely estimate the costs of the

[[Page 501]]

registration process at the time, but implemented the $10 fee to 
provide an initial stream of revenue to fund part of the costs to USCIS 
of operating the registration program. Id. DHS stated that USCIS would 
review the fee in the future. Id. DHS proposes $215 based on the 
results of the FY 2022/2023 fee review. See proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(c)(11).
    USCIS lacks information on the direct cost of H-1B registration, 
but USCIS estimated the indirect costs of the H-1B registration program 
using the same methods as it did to calculate other fees. The 
methodology for estimating the cost provides results that are similar 
to the USCIS Immigrant Fee, which was established as part of the FY 
2010/2011 fee rule. See 75 FR 58979. However, the H-1B registration fee 
contains and funds fewer activities. DHS bases the proposed fee on the 
activity costs for the following activities:

 Inform the Public
 Management and Oversight

    As such, the proposed fee is based on the estimated cost of these 
two activities. See the supporting documentation included in the docket 
for this rulemaking for more information on USCIS fee review 
activities. The proposed fee does not include activity costs for paper 
intake because registration is only available online. It does not 
include the cost of any adjudication activities because the fee is only 
for registration, not a decision. If selected, the petitioner must file 
Form I-129 separately.
    DHS understands that an increase from $10 to $215 may appear to be 
exorbitant at first glance. However, the $10 fee was established simply 
to cover a small portion of the costs of the program rather than 
perpetually leaving 100 percent of those costs to be funded by the fees 
paid for other unrelated requests. As stated in the rule setting the 
fee, ``DHS proposed a $10 fee to provide an initial stream of revenue 
to mitigate potential fiscal effects on USCIS. Following implementation 
of the registration fee provided for in this rule, USCIS will gather 
data on the costs and burdens of administering the registration process 
in its next biennial fee review to determine whether a fee adjustment 
is necessary to ensure full cost recovery.'' 84 FR 60309. DHS sees no 
reasons why U.S. employers who wish to temporarily employ foreign 
workers in specialty occupations should not cover the expenses of the 
H-1B registration program, which is a prerequisite to being able to 
file a nonimmigrant petition for a foreign worker in the H-1B 
nonimmigrant classification. Even with the higher registration fee 
requirement, the registration process is still expected to result in a 
net cost-savings to USCIS and petitioners due to cost savings 
associated with unselected petitions in DHS' Registration Requirement 
for Petitioners Seeking to File H-1B Petitions on Behalf of Cap-Subject 
Aliens.\289\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \289\ See 84 FR 940.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

L. Premium Processing--Business Days

    DHS proposes to define the premium processing timeframe for all 
immigration benefit request types designated for premium processing to 
only include business days.\290\ DHS is proposing to define business 
days as days that the Federal Government is open for business, which do 
not include weekends, federally observed holidays, or days on which 
Federal Government offices are closed, such as for weather-related or 
other reasons.\291\ 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 current premium 
processing timeframe interpretation in June 2001. See ``Establishing 
Premium Processing Service for Employment-Based Petitions and 
Applications,'' 66 FR 29682. The rule's preamble stated that the 
District of Columbia Appropriations Act of 2001 (Pub. L. 106-553) 
``specified that the Service was required to process applications under 
the Premium Processing Service in 15 calendar days,'' as part of a 
general description of the statute. 66 FR 29682.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \290\ See 8 CFR 106.4(e). DHS lengthened the timeframe for USCIS 
to take an adjudicative action on petitions filed with a request for 
premium processing from 15 calendar days to 15 business days in the 
2020 fee rule. See 8 CFR 106.4 (Oct. 2, 2020). However, on March 30, 
2022, USCIS published the Implementation of the Stopgap USCIS 
Stabilization Act rule (Premium Processing Rule), which amended 
USCIS premium processing regulations by updating the regulations to 
include the fees established by the Emergency Stopgap USCIS 
Stabilization Act for immigration benefit requests that were 
designated for premium processing on August 1, 2020, and established 
new fees and processing timeframes consistent with section 4102(b) 
of the Emergency Stopgap USCIS Stabilization Act. See 87 FR 18227. 
The Premium Processing Rule explained that USCIS was not calculating 
premium processing timeframes in business days because at that time 
8 CFR 106.4 was not being administered as a result of the injunction 
staying the 2020 Fee Rule in ILRC and NWIRP. The Premium Processing 
rule explained that by removing the reference to business days in 
the premium processing regulations, the premium processing 
regulations will be clear and consistent with current practices and 
requirements and not be a source of confusion to the public. Id. at 
18233.
    \291\ DHS recognizes that calculating premium processing 
timeframes in business days is inconsistent with the definition of 
``day'' in 8 CFR 1.2, which provides that when computing the period 
of time for taking any action [in chapter I of title 8 of the CFR] 
including the taking of an appeal, [it] shall include Saturdays, 
Sundays, and legal holidays, except that when the last day of the 
period computed falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or a legal holiday, the 
period shall run until the end of the next day which is not a 
Saturday, Sunday, or a legal holiday. However, having recognized the 
definition of ``day'' in 8 CFR 1.2, DHS believes for the reasons 
stated and explained in the preamble that it is necessary for DHS to 
define premium processing timelines in business days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS has re-examined the District of Columbia Appropriations Act of 
2001 and found that it did not define the timeframe by which INS was 
required to process applications under the Premium Processing Service 
and was, in fact, silent on the issue.\292\ Thus, DHS has determined 
that the June 1, 2001, interim rule stating a 15 calendar day 
processing timeframe was required by the District of Columbia 
Appropriations Act of 2001 was incorrect because there is nothing in 
that statute establishing a timeframe in which premium processing must 
occur, let alone how that timeframe is to be calculated. Without a 
specific timeframe or an explanation of how that timeframe is to be 
calculated, DHS may interpret its authority under INA sec. 286(u), 8 
U.S.C. 1356(u), to define the timeframe in which premium processing 
must occur. Thus, DHS has reevaluated its old statutory interpretation 
to see if the premium processing program and premium processing 
timeframes can be revised to make the program more serviceable for 
USCIS while continuing to provide an expedited level of processing for 
their immigration petitions and applications.\293\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \292\ See Public Law 106-553 (2000) sec. 112.
    \293\ DHS also notes that section 4102(b) of the USCIS 
Stabilization Act provides premium processing times of 30 and 45 
days, indicating that Congress considers periods that are two and 
three times longer than 15 days to be premium service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When USCIS is unable to complete premium processing within the 
required timeframe, USCIS must suspend premium processing. When USCIS 
suspends premium processing, it must refund the fees for the premium 
processing requests it cannot complete. In recent years, USCIS has 
suspended for certain categories of employment-based petitions when it 
determines that it has inadequate resources to devote to premium 
processing requests, and might otherwise refund a large number of Form 
I-907 fees for failure to meet the required processing timeframe.\294\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \294\ USCIS has not suspended premium processing for any 
requests since the USCIS Stabilization Act became law. That law 
provides that DHS may suspend the availability of premium processing 
for designated immigration benefit requests only if circumstances 
prevent the completion of processing of a significant number of such 
requests within the required period. 8 U.S.C. 1356(u)(5)(A). While 
that law reiterates the standard that USCIS has generally followed 
in suspending premium processing, DHS does not know if that 
provision will reduce future suspensions by itself.

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

[[Page 502]]

    In certain instances, USCIS has been unable to maintain existing 
premium processing timeframes due to the high volume of incoming 
petitions and a significant surge in premium processing requests.\295\ 
For example, USCIS twice suspended premium processing before cap-
subject H-1B season, which is the largest premium processing workload. 
In one such circumstance, USCIS initially announced it expected the 
suspension to last up to 6 months then extended it for several more 
months.\296\ The suspension not only lasted longer than USCIS initially 
announced, but it also lasted well past the start date (October 1) for 
H-1B cap employees. As a result, this led to uncertainty for both 
employers and employees, because the employees were not able to timely 
start when the employers requested and neither party could predict when 
the employees would ultimately begin their employment. In addition to 
the harm and uncertainty that suspensions cause employers, when premium 
processing must be suspended, USCIS is not able to obtain the revenue 
from premium processing to offset its costs and for other uses. USCIS 
currently shifts adjudicators and other resources to address seasonal 
increases in filings. USCIS will also transfer files to offices with 
more processing capacity as needed. However, shifting adjudicators or 
files to focus on premium processing does not achieve the efficiency 
needed as higher volumes of incoming petitions or applications limit 
USCIS' ability to complete processing within the required processing 
timeframe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \295\ See USCIS, ``USCIS Will Temporarily Suspend Premium 
Processing for All H-1B Petitions,'' available at https://www.uscis.gov/archive/uscis-will-temporarily-suspend-premium-processing-all-h-1b-petitions (last updated March 3, 2017); see also 
``USCIS Will Temporarily Suspend Premium Processing for Fiscal Year 
2019 H-1B Cap Petitions,'' available at https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-will-temporarily-suspend-premium-processing-fiscal-year-2019-h-1b-cap-petitions (last updated March 20, 2018).
    \296\ See USCIS, ``USCIS Resumes Premium Processing for Fiscal 
Year 2019 H-1B Cap Petitions,'' available at https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-resumes-premium-processing-for-fiscal-year-2019-h-1b-cap-petitions (last updated Jan. 25, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    USCIS also had to suspend premium processing due to the COVID-19 
pandemic.\297\ At that time, all the petitions eligible for premium 
processing were filed on paper at the service centers. Service centers 
needed time to adapt workspace configurations and procedures to ensure 
physical distancing and other safety protocols for employees working on 
site and picking up and dropping off files. Contracted employees had to 
be in the building to receive the petitions, data enter them into the 
system, put the files together, and deliver the files to the 
adjudicators. The adjudicators had to come into the building to pick up 
and drop off the files. The requirement of physical presence in the 
building greatly inhibited USCIS' ability to process petitions within 
the allotted timeframe. Irrespective of the COVID-19 pandemic, many of 
the benefit requests eligible for premium processing are still filed 
manually on paper, which necessarily requires USCIS employees and 
contractors to physically handle such benefit requests. If something 
should occur, such as a natural or manmade disaster, that interferes or 
prevents USCIS employees or contractors from being able to adjudicate 
benefit requests seeking premium processing, those workdays lost should 
not count against the premium processing timeframe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \297\ See USCIS, ``USCIS Announces Temporary Suspension of 
Premium Processing for All I-129 and I-140 Petitions Due to the 
Coronavirus Pandemic,'' available at https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-announces-temporary-suspension-of-premium-processing-for-all-i-129-and-i-140-petitions-due-to (last updated Mar. 27, 
2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    USCIS employees are limited in the hours they are available to work 
by collective bargaining agreements and contracted staff are limited to 
the hours provided by contract, and both Federal employees and 
contracted staff are prohibited from working outside regular business 
hours or while not in a pay status. If USCIS needs its employees to 
work overtime to process these petitions and applications within a 
certain timeframe, it must of course pay them the applicable overtime 
pay rate. Because USCIS adjudication operations are fee funded, USCIS 
does not always have sufficient funds to support overtime; therefore, 
it must calculate the premium processing timeframes based on the days 
in which it can actually process petitions and applications (business 
days). USCIS is not asserting that all adjudications will increase to 
the full allowance of business days, however this change provides 
needed flexibility for holidays, weather emergencies, and other 
circumstances outside the agency's control.
    In addition, the USCIS Stabilization Act prohibits USCIS from 
making premium processing available if it adversely affects processing 
times for immigration benefit requests not designated for premium 
processing or the regular processing of immigration benefit requests so 
designated. See USCIS Stabilization Act, sec. 4102(c), Public Law 116-
159 (Oct. 1, 2020). The USCIS Stabilization Act allows for expansion of 
premium processing to certain EB-1 and EB-2 (NIW) petitions, which are 
more complex adjudications typically containing voluminous evidence and 
generally requiring more time to adjudicate than benefit types 
previously afforded premium processing. See 8 U.S.C. 1356(u)(2)(B). It 
also allows for expansion to Forms I-539 and I-765, which, while less 
complex, constitute an exceptionally large filing volume which 
necessitates a longer processing time. See 8 U.S.C. 1356(u)(2)(C) and 
(D). USCIS must have sufficient staff able to process premium 
processing cases during the allotted timeframe.
    USCIS cannot expand premium processing, which was specifically 
requested by many commentors in the previous fee rule, until it has 
sufficient staff to consistently adjudicate within the timeframes. 
However, it is difficult to estimate the staff needed to process 
petitions during a certain timeframe using calendar days. In 2018, 
premium processing was suspended in April, then the suspension was 
extended until after the Federal holidays in December and January. In 
the last 2 weeks of December 2018, USCIS lost 3 days of processing to 
Federal holidays and 4 days to weekends. USCIS cannot hire additional 
staff in short periods of time, nor can it reallocate staff without 
affecting other processing times. DHS's proposed solution to 
consistently offer and expand (as Congress has authorized) premium 
processing services is to calculate the timeframe in business days. 
Calculating the premium processing timeframes based on the days in 
which USCIS is actually processing petitions and applications (business 
days) will enable USCIS to make premium processing more consistently 
available and expand it to the newly designated classifications and 
categories as intended by the USCIS Stabilization Act. This avoids 
USCIS having to suspend premium processing, which limits access to more 
applicants and petitioners and extends the pending period for 
adjudication.
    DHS has determined that it is more appropriate for the premium 
processing timeframes to be calculated using business days rather than 
calendar days and proposes to apply this interpretation to all premium 
processing timeframes.\298\ USCIS considers

[[Page 503]]

calculating premium processing timeframes in business days appropriate 
because: (1) USCIS can only process petitions and applications on 
business days; (2) using calendar days results in inconsistent and 
varying timeframes for USCIS to process requests for premium processing 
based on holidays and weather emergencies; and (3) using calendars days 
causes particular operational challenges when trying to meet the 
shorter 15-day premium processing timeframe applicable to certain 
immigration benefits. By changing to business days instead of calendar 
days, USCIS avoids having to suspend premium processing more frequently 
which therefore alleviates the waiting time for applicants and 
petitioners.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \298\ On October 1, 2020, the USCIS Stabilization Act amended 
section 286(u) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1356(u), and did not define how 
to calculate the timeframe by which USCIS must process applications 
under the Premium Processing Service, with section 286(u) of the 
INA, 8 U.S.C. 1356(u), still remaining silent on the issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Separate from this rulemaking, USCIS is providing more flexibility 
in paying the premium processing fee. For example, USCIS piloted and 
expanded credit card payments for Forms I-129, I-140, and I-907.\299\ 
USCIS will continue to evaluate options that give employers more 
options and flexibility when using premium processing and when filing 
petitions in general.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \299\ See USCIS, ``USCIS Expands Credit Card Payment Pilot 
Program to California Service Center'', available at https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/alerts/uscis-expands-credit-card-payment-pilot-program-to-california-service-center (last updated Nov. 5, 
2021); see also USCIS, ``USCIS Expands Credit Card Payment Pilot 
Program to Vermont Service Center'', available at https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/alerts/uscis-expands-credit-card-payment-pilot-program-to-vermont-service-center (last updated Oct 21, 2021); 
see also USCIS, ``USCIS Expands Credit Card Payment Pilot Program to 
Form I-140 When Requesting Premium Processing'', available at 
https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-expands-credit-card-payment-pilot-program-to-form-i-140-when-requesting-premium-processing (last 
updated July 20, 2021); see also USCIS, ``USCIS Expands Credit Card 
Payment Pilot Program to Texas Service Center'', available at 
https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/alerts/uscis-expands-credit-card-payment-pilot-program-to-texas-service-center (last updated Sept 9, 
2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

M. Permitting Combined Payment of the Premium Processing Fee

    DHS proposes to permit the fee to request premium processing 
service to be paid with the same remittance as other filing fees. 
Proposed 8 CFR 106.4(b). DHS currently requires the fee to request 
premium processing service to be paid in a separate remittance from 
other filing fees. 8 CFR 106.4(b). DHS has found in its application of 
the new premium processing regulations (87 FR 18260) that mandating a 
separate payment in all premium processing submissions may impose 
unnecessary burdens on petitioners, applicants and DHS. For example, 
any limitation on fee intake that must be enforced by USCIS adds a 
business requirement for the immigration benefit to be accepted. Each 
rule requires system programming and may result in unnecessary 
rejections. Thus, DHS proposes, instead of mandating the separate 
payment, to provide that USCIS may require the fee to request premium 
processing service to be paid in a separate remittance from other 
filing fees. Proposed 8 CFR 106.4(b). DHS will maintain the authority 
to require separate payments when combined payments need to be 
precluded because they cause intake and acceptance problems. USCIS may 
require the premium processing service fee be paid in a separate 
remittance from other filing fees and preclude combined payments in the 
applicable form instructions. Id.

N. Intercountry Adoptions

    DHS made several changes in the 2020 fee rule related to 
intercountry adoptions. See 8 CFR 204.3 and 204.312 (Oct. 2, 2020). As 
discussed elsewhere, DHS and USCIS are enjoined from following the 
regulations codified by that rule and DHS is proposing this rule to 
replace the 2020 fee rule. Nevertheless, commenters supported the 
changes to the handling of Hague Adoption Convention transition cases 
and the adoption process improvements in that rule. See 85 FR 46850. 
Therefore, in the following sections of this preamble, DHS generally 
repeats the rationale that we provided for all of the adoption related 
changes from the 2019 proposed rule. See 84 FR 62313-62315.
1. Adjustment to Proposed Fees for Certain Intercountry Adoption-
Specific Forms
    DHS proposes to limit the increase of adoption-related fees in this 
rule 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-600A, then this benefit request would have a fee of at 
least $1,454.\300\ 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 18 percent weighted average 
increase to the current fee of $775, which represents a $145 increase 
to $920 for Forms I-600/600A/800/800A. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(29), 
(30), (44), and (45). The percentage increase is not specific to 
adoption application and petition fees. It is the same percentage that 
DHS uses for all USCIS fees that DHS proposes to keep below full cost. 
See section V.B.3. It is worth noting that the proposed fee would 
include the cost of biometric services under this proposal. See section 
VIII.E. of this preamble. As such, the $920 proposed fee is less than 
the current $775 plus the separate $85 fees for biometric services for 
two adults in a household. Two adults in a household would pay $945 
with the current fee structure for intercountry adoption. Thus, the 
proposed fees are $25 less than the current fees for two adults in a 
household who file an intercountry adoption-based application or 
petition to adopt a single child or birth siblings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \300\ Model output from Appendix Table 4 in the FY 2022/2023 
Immigration Examinations Fee Account Fee Review Supporting 
Documentation (supporting documentation) in the docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS greatly values its role in intercountry adoptions and places 
high priority on the accurate and timely processing of immigration 
applications and petitions that enable U.S. families to provide 
permanent homes for adopted children from around the world. It also 
recognizes that the financial costs, both foreign and domestic, 
involved in intercountry adoptions can have significant impacts on 
these families. DHS has a history of modifying policies to ease burdens 
associated with international adoption. Before 2007, USCIS required 
prospective adoptive parents who had not found a suitable child for 
adoption within 18 months after approval of their Application for 
Advance Processing of an Orphan Petition, Form I-600A, to submit a fee 
with their request to extend their approval. Since 2007, USCIS has 
permitted adoptive parents to request one extension of their Form I-
600A approval without charge, including the biometric fee. See 72 FR 
29864; 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(Z) (Oct. 1, 2020). Finally, DHS does not 
charge an additional filing fee for an adoption petition filed on 
behalf of the first beneficiary child or birth siblings. See 8 CFR 
103.7(b)(1)(i)(Z) and (b)(1)(i)(JJ)(1) (Oct. 1, 2020).
    DHS also has a history of setting adoption-related fees lower than 
the amount suggested by the fee-setting methodology. In the 2010 fee 
rule, the calculated fee for adoption petitions and applications (Forms 
I-600/I-600A and I-800/I-800A) was $1,455, based on

[[Page 504]]

projected costs. See 75 FR 33461; 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(Y), (Z), (II), 
(JJ) (Oct. 1, 2020). In the FY 2016/2017 fee review, DHS set the Form 
I-600 fee at $775 despite the estimated cost of $2,258. See 81 FR 
73299. Shifting the adoption application and petition costs to other 
fees is consistent with past DHS efforts and is in the public interest 
to support parents of children adopted abroad.
2. Clarification of Fee Exemption for Birth Siblings
    DHS proposes to revise and republish amendments to 8 CFR 106.2, 
204.3, and 204.313 to clarify the regulations and align them with 
current practice that prospective adoptive parents with a valid Form I-
600A or Form I-800A approval are not required to pay a fee for the 
first Form I-600 or Form I-800 petition. If they are approved to adopt 
more than one child, they are required to pay the filing fee for 
additional Form I-600 or Form I-800 petitions unless the beneficiaries 
are birth siblings.
    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 up to 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 sec. 
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 sibling'' synonymously, which includes half-siblings but 
does not include adoptive siblings.
    DHS also proposes to remove fee-related language from 8 CFR 
204.3(h)(3)(i)(C) and (D) because this language will be covered in 8 
CFR 106.2.
3. Suitability and Eligibility Approval Validity Period
    DHS proposes to revise and republish the amendments to 8 CFR 204.3 
relating to orphan cases under INA sec. 101(b)(1)(F), 8 U.S.C. 
1101(b)(1)(F) (non-Convention cases). The proposed revised and 
republished 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.
    Currently, the approval of a Form I-600A in an orphan case is valid 
for 18 months. See 8 CFR 204.3(h)(3)(i) (Oct. 1, 2020). However, 
standard USCIS policy has been that the FBI's clearance of a person's 
fingerprints is valid for 15 months, thereby creating inconsistency 
between the 15-month fingerprint clearance validity and 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 15-month 
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. See proposed 
8 CFR 204.3(b), (d), and (h)(7) and (13). See proposed 8 CFR 
204.3(h)(3).\301\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \301\ 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 where documents will be forwarded and how notification 
of overseas offices of the approval is handled. DHS is also 
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. Finally, DHS is also adding a reference 
to proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(31) in Sec.  204.3(h)(3)(i), relating to 
Form I-600A extension requests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS proposes to remove fee-related language from 8 CFR 
204.3(h)(3)(ii) because that language would be unnecessarily redundant 
with the fee language in proposed 8 CFR 106.2.
4. Form I-600A/I-600, Supplement 3, Request for Action on Approved Form 
I-600A/I-600
    DHS proposes to revise and republish the regulation that creates a 
new form \302\ to further align the processes for adoptions from 
countries that are not party to the Hague Adoption Convention (Hague or 
Convention) with the processes for adoptions from countries that are 
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 $455. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(31). As discussed in the 
PRA section of this preamble, the draft Supplement 3 is posted in the 
docket of this rulemaking for the public to review and provide 
comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \302\ As defined in 8 CFR 1.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, prospective adoptive parents face different processes 
for requests for action on approved suitability applications in Hague 
cases than they do in non-Hague cases. USCIS uses Forms I-800, I-800A, 
and I-800A Supplement 3 for Hague cases. USCIS uses Forms I-600 and I-
600A for orphan cases. A fee for Form I-600A/I-600 Supplement 3 would 
further align the Form I-600A/I-600 request for action process with the 
existing Form I-800A process in four key areas:

    1. Suitability and eligibility extensions.
    2. New approval notices.
    3. Change of country; and
    4. Duplicate approval notices.

    USCIS adjudicators must reassess 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.
    Requirements related to a prospective adoptive parent's change in 
marital status for the orphan process are similar to the Hague process, 
but not identical. This is because the orphan process provides an 
option for combination filing, unlike the Hague process. In the orphan 
process, a prospective adoptive parent can file their Form I-600 
petition on behalf of a specific child together with the supporting 
documents for Form I-600A, Application for Advance Processing of an 
Orphan Petition, to request that USCIS decide their suitability and 
eligibility to adopt at the same time as the child's eligibility. This 
is referred to as combination filing.
    For Hague cases, prospective adoptive parents cannot use Form I-800 
Supplement 3 if their marital status

[[Page 505]]

changes. If the prospective adoptive parent's marital status changes 
before they complete the intercountry adoption process, their Form I-
800A approval is automatically revoked. This is because a change in 
marital status considerably changes the facts supporting a prior 
suitability approval and who the adoptive parents will be. The 
prospective adoptive parent must submit a new Form I-800A with an 
updated home study. If the prospective adoptive parent had already 
filed a Form I-800 based on the approval of the prior Form I-800A, they 
must also file a new Form I-800. The prospective adoptive parent must 
pay a new application fee unless their Form I-800A is still pending. 
See 8 CFR 204.312(e)(2).
    Similarly, a prospective adoptive parent will not be able to use 
Form I-600A/I-600 Supplement 3 for the orphan process if their marital 
status changes. If the prospective adoptive parent's marital status 
changes before they complete the intercountry adoption process, they 
must submit a new a Form I-600A or Form I-600 combination filing 
(referred to in this preamble as a ``suitability application'') with an 
updated home study. If the prospective adoptive parent already filed a 
Form I-600 based on the approval of the prior Form I-600A, they must 
also file a new Form I-600. They must pay a new application or petition 
fee unless their suitability application is still pending. This is 
consistent with longstanding practices, as reflected in prior versions 
of the Form I-600A and Form I-600 instructions, which has required that 
prospective adoptive parents file a new suitability application with an 
updated home study if their marital status changes, rather than relying 
on the previously filed suitability application, regardless of whether 
the suitability application is pending or approved. With the addition 
in this proposed rule of the Supplement 3 for the orphan process, DHS 
proposes to codify this longstanding practice at 8 CFR 204.3(h)(14), 
consistent with the Hague process at 8 CFR 204.312(e)(2).
    Table 20 and the following sections summarize the current process 
and the proposed changes.
BILLING CODE 9111-97-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.058


[[Page 506]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.059

BILLING CODE 9111-97-C
a. Suitability and Eligibility Extensions
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \303\ See section VIII.N.4.e for limitations in Hague Adoption 
Convention transition cases and countries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, prospective adoptive parents pursuing an intercountry 
adoption from non-Hague countries may request a no-fee initial 
extension of their Form I-600A approval.\304\ 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) (2020) (Oct. 1, 2020). 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 $455. See proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \304\ The Form I-600A approval notice reflects the validity 
period of the prospective adoptive parents' suitability and 
eligibility determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, if an applicant needs to extend their Form I-600A 
approval, they may file a written request for an extension no more than 
90 days before their Form I-600A suitability approval expires, but on 
or before its expiration date. DHS now proposes that an applicant must 
file a Supplement 3 to seek an extension before their Form I-600A 
suitability approval expires. A Supplement 3 seeking an extension 
cannot be filed more than 90 days before the Form I-600A suitability 
approval expires and must be filed before the approval expires if they 
need to extend their validity period. A Supplement 3 may be denied if 
filed sooner.\305\ This

[[Page 507]]

codifies the administrative efficiencies created by ensuring applicants 
timely file their extensions and mirrors the existing time frames for 
requesting an extension. In addition, this further aligns the processes 
for requesting extensions for adoptions from countries that are not 
party to the Hague Adoption Convention (Hague) with the processes for 
countries that are a party to that Convention. See proposed 8 CFR 
204.3(h)(3)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \305\ This is current practice that DHS is codifying with the 
creation of Supplement 3 and a fee. See USCIS Policy Manual Volume 
5, Adoptions, Part B, Adoptive Parent Suitability Determinations 
Chapter 5, Action on Pending or Approved Suitability Determinations 
[5 USCIS-PM B.5] available at https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-5-part-b-chapter-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS proposes to remove 8 CFR 204.3(h)(3)(ii) (Oct. 1, 2020). This 
regulation that provides for DHS to extend suitability approvals 
without the prospective adoptive parents requesting one in certain 
scenarios would no longer be necessary because applicants would have a 
form (Supplement 3) they can file to request unlimited extension 
requests for non-Hague cases. Currently, DHS does not have a form for 
applicants to request extensions for non-Hague cases, and only allows 
one written extension request. In association with this rule, DHS 
proposes to create a form that prospective adoptive parents can use to 
file unlimited extension requests for non-Hague cases. In addition, 
this proposed change also aligns the non-Hague adoptions regulations 
with the Hague Adoption Convention regulations, which do not contain a 
parallel provision that provides DHS authority to extend suitability 
approvals in the event of such emergency because prospective adoptive 
parents can file a form to request an extension and can do so an 
unlimited number of times. Finally, DHS has an obligation to ensure 
applicants remain suitable for intercountry adoption and must update 
our suitability determination before extending approvals. For this 
reason, DHS proposes to remove 8 CFR 204.3(h)(3)(ii) (Oct. 1, 
2020).\306\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \306\ This provision was changed by the 2020 fee rule, to remove 
language specific to SARS, and to replace with more general language 
about a public health or other emergency. 85 FR 46921; 8 CFR 
204.3(h)(3)(ii) (Oct. 2, 2020). DHS now proposes to remove that 
provision altogether for the reasons stated here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. New Approval Notices
    Currently, prospective adoptive parents using the non-Hague process 
may request a new approval notice based on a significant change in 
circumstances at no cost. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(Z) (Oct. 1, 2020). 
DHS proposes that prospective adoptive parents must file the proposed 
Form I-600A/I-600 Supplement 3, and an updated home study, to notify 
USCIS of a significant change and request a new approval notice. See 
proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(31). The prospective adoptive parent must pay 
the proposed fee of $455 unless they are also filing either a first-
time request for an extension or first-time 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. They 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) (Oct. 
1, 2020). 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 free. Second or subsequent requests would require the proposed 
fee of $455. Id.
d. Duplicate Approval Notices
    Currently, prospective adoptive parents may request a duplicate 
approval notice by filing Form I-824, Application for Action on an 
Approved Application or Petition, with its $465 fee. DHS proposes that 
prospective adoptive parents make duplicate approval notice requests by 
filing the proposed Form I-600A/I-600 Supplement 3, with the proposed 
fee of $455. See proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(31).
e. 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 Form 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 parents: (1) filed a Form I-600A that designated the 
transition country as the intended country of adoption or did not 
designate a specific country and filed the Form I-600 while the Form I-
600A approval was still valid; (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 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.
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, 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, no-
fee extension of their Form I-600A approval 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)(31). Generally, transition countries 
have requested that DHS limit the ability of transition cases to 
continue indefinitely 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 non-Hague 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 again

[[Page 508]]

under the Hague process, which has different processing requirements. 
If the prospective adoptive parents already designated a country of 
intended adoption other than the transition country on their Form I-
600A or previously changed countries to a non-transition country, they 
generally would not fall into the category of families the transition 
criteria were intended to reach because the designation is an 
indication that 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 non-transition country on their Form I-600A or previously changed 
countries to a non-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)(31).
iii. Request 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.\307\ However, unless prohibited by the new 
Convention country, DHS will permit prospective adoptive parents 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)(31). 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 sec. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \307\ See USCIS, ``Transition Cases'', available at https://www.uscis.gov/adoption/immigration-through-adoption/transition-cases 
(last viewed Jun. 21, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Form I-800A, Supplement 3, Request for Action on Approved Form I-
800A
    DHS also proposes a fee of $455 at 8 CFR 106.2 and revises and 
republishes a clarification to 8 CFR 204.312 to align with the current 
process for adjudicating Form I-800A 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, change of country, or duplicate 
approval notice 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 republish 8 CFR 
204.312(e)(3)(i) to permit the filing of Form I-800A Supplement 3 
regardless of whether Form I-800 has been filed.
    DHS proposes to revise 8 CFR 204.312(e)(3)(ii) to clarify the 
evidentiary requirements for updates due to significant changes. The 
Supplement 3 can be filed for an extension request, a change of 
country, a duplicate approval notice, or an update due to a significant 
change. The evidentiary requirements are the same regardless of which 
type of request the applicant makes. However, the current regulation 
only describes the evidence required for a Supplement 3 for an 
extension request or a change of country. The current regulations do 
not include updates when listing evidentiary requirements for 
Supplement 3. This proposed clarification mirrors current practices and 
form instructions. See proposed 8 CFR 204.312(e)(3)(ii).
    DHS proposes to remove the fee language from 8 CFR 
204.312(e)(3)(i), including amending paragraph (e)(3)(i)(A) and 
striking paragraphs (e)(3)(i)(C) and (D), because this language is 
unnecessarily redundant with the fees in 8 CFR 106.2.

O. Immigrant Investors

1. Immediate Effects of the EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022
    DHS proposes changes to various fees for regional centers and 
related immigration benefit requests related to Employment-Based 
Immigrant Visa, Fifth Preference (EB-5). As explained in section III.F. 
above, on March 15, 2022, the President signed the EB-5 Reform and 
Integrity Act of 2022, Div. BB of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 
2022 (Public Law 117-103). The EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022 
repealed the prior authorizing statute for the EB-5 ``regional center 
program'' and codified a substantially reformed regional center program 
in the INA, effective 60 days after enactment on May 14, 2022. The EB-5 
Reform and Integrity Act of 2022 has no immediate impact on the 
staffing levels of the USCIS Immigrant Investor Program Office. 
Nevertheless, and despite the changes in the law and program, DHS has 
proposed fees in this rule based on the currently projected staffing 
needs to meet the adjudicative and administrative burden of the 
Immigrant Investor Program Office pending the fee study required by 
section 106(a) of the EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022.
2. Background of the EB-5 Program
    Congress created the EB-5 program in 1990 to stimulate the U.S. 
economy through job creation and capital investment by immigrant 
investors. The EB-5 regional center program was later added in 1992 by 
the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and 
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1993. Public Law 102-395, sec. 
610, 106 Stat. 1828 (Oct. 6, 1992). As amended by the EB-5 Reform and 
Integrity Act of 2022, the EB-5 program makes approximately 10,000 
visas available annually to foreign nationals (and their dependents) 
who invest at least $1,050,000 or a

[[Page 509]]

discounted amount of $800,000 if the investment is in a targeted 
employment area (TEA) (which includes certain rural areas and areas of 
high unemployment) or infrastructure project in a U.S. business that 
will create at least 10 full-time jobs in the United States for 
qualifying employees. See INA sec. 203(b)(5), 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(5); 8 
U.S.C. 11538 U.S.C. 1153. Investors may satisfy up to 90 percent of the 
job creation requirements with jobs that are estimated to be created 
indirectly through qualifying investments within a commercial 
enterprise associated with a regional center approved by USCIS for 
participation in the regional center program. INA sec. 203(b)(5), 8 
U.S.C. 1153(b)(5). In FY 2013, USCIS created the Immigration Investor 
Program Office (IPO) in Washington, DC, to handle EB-5 matters, hiring 
staff with expertise in economics, law, business, finance, securities, 
and banking to enhance consistency, timeliness, and integrity within 
the program.
    USCIS is committed to strengthening the integrity and improving the 
overall administration of the EB-5 program. There is perennial and 
increasing media attention around the EB-5 Program, largely created 
around the exploitation of the program by abusive actors.\308\ Since 
the FY 2016/2017 fee rule, IPO added staff positions to focus both on 
managing the program and identifying fraud, national security, public 
safety, and non-compliance concerns within the program. For example, 
IPO hired auditors to complete regional center compliance reviews 
associated with the review of the annual certification filings. See INA 
section 203(b)(5)(G), 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(5)(G). On March 20, 2017, USCIS 
instituted EB-5 regional center compliance reviews to enhance the EB-5 
program integrity and verify information in regional center 
applications and annual certifications. USCIS designed this program to 
verify the information provided by designated regional centers and 
verify compliance with applicable laws and authorities to ensure 
continued eligibility for the regional center designation. These 
compliance reviews are full-file reviews and include contact via 
written correspondence, telephone, interviews, and onsite assessments 
conducted by IPO auditors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \308\ Michelle Hackman & Konrad Putzier, ``Cash-for-Visa Program 
Looks to Be in Jeopardy,'' The Wall Street Journal (June 15, 2021), 
available at https://www.wsj.com/articles/cash-for-visa-program-looks-to-be-in-jeopardy-11623758401; see also U.S. Citizenship and 
Immigr. Servs., U.S. Dep't of Homeland Security, ``Hearing on 
``Citizenship for Sale: Oversight of the EB-5 Investor Visa 
Program'' before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary on June 19, 
2018'' (last updated June 19, 2018), available at https://www.uscis.gov/tools/resources-for-congress/testimonies/hearing-on-citizenship-for-sale-oversight-of-the-eb-5-investor-visa-program-before-the-senate; U.S. Dep't of Justice, Office of Public Affairs, 
``Chinese National Pleads Guilty to Illegal Exports to Northwest 
Polytechnical University'' (Apr. 28, 2021), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-national-pleads-guilty-illegal-exports-northwestern-polytechnical-university; U.S. Dep't of 
Justice, U.S. Attorney's Office, Eastern District of Louisiana, 
``Ex-White House Military Aide and Maryland Businessman Found Guilty 
for Operating Fraudulent EB-5 Visa Scheme (Sept. 6, 2019), available 
at https://www.justice.gov/usao-edla/pr/ex-white-house-military-aide-and-maryland-businessman-found-guilty-operating-fraudulent; 
U.S. Dep't of Justice, U.S. Attorney's Office, West District of 
Wisconsin, ``Developer Sentenced to 4 Years in Prison for Defrauding 
Investors seeking Permanent Residency under Federal Immigration 
Program (Aug. 4, 2017), available at https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdwa/pr/developer-sentenced-4-years-prison-defrauding-investors-seeking-permanent-residency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Proposed EB-5 Program Fees
    The proposed fee for Forms I-526, Immigrant Petition by Alien 
Entrepreneur, and Form I-526E, Immigrant Petition by Regional Center 
Investor, is $11,160, a $7,485 or 204 percent increase from the current 
$3,675 fee. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(W) (Oct. 1, 2020); proposed 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(24). The proposed fee for Form I-829, Petition by Investor to 
Remove Conditions on Permanent Resident Status, is $9,525, a $5,775 or 
154 percent increase from the current $3,750 fee. See 8 CFR 
103.7(b)(1)(i)(PP) (Oct. 1, 2020); proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(51). The 
proposed fee for Form I-956, Application for Regional Center 
Designation, is $47,695, a $29,900 or 168-percent increase from the 
$17,795 fee for Form I-924, Application for Regional Center Designation 
under the Immigrant Investor Program. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(WW) 
(Oct. 1, 2020); proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(64). DHS also proposes a 
$47,695 fee for Form I-956F, Application for Approval of Investment in 
a Commercial Enterprise, because the information it collects and the 
benefit that results was previously an optional submission that was 
adjudicated on Form I-924, when included. Section 103(b)(1)(F) of the 
EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022, Div. BB of the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act, 2022 (Pub. L. 117-103) now requires a regional 
center, once designated with an approved Form I-956, to submit an 
application for approval of an investment in a commercial enterprise 
(Form I-956F). The proposed fee for Form I-956G, Regional Center Annual 
Statement, is $4,470, a $1,435 or 47 percent increase from the $3,035 
fee for Form I-924A, Annual Certification of Regional Center. See 8 CFR 
103.7(b)(1)(i)(WW) (Oct. 1, 2020); proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(66). The EB-
5 program encompasses Forms I-526, I-526E, I-829, I-956, I-965F, and I-
956G.\309\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \309\ DHS has also created Forms I-956H, Bona Fides of Persons 
Involved with Regional Center Program, and I-956K Registration for 
Direct and Third-Party Promoters, for the new EB-5 program. DHS 
proposes no fee for those forms in this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the FY 2016/2017 fee rule, USCIS planned for 204 positions in 
IPO. In the FY 2022/2023 fee review, USCIS estimates an annual average 
requirement of 245 positions in IPO. As discussed earlier, projected 
volumes and completion rates are two of the main drivers in the fee 
review.\310\ Staffing requirements and costs change as volume or 
completion rate estimates change. Generally, EB-5 volume estimates 
decreased since the FY 2016/2017 fee rule while completion rate 
estimates increased.\311\ For example, the FY 2022/2023 workload volume 
estimate for Forms I-526 and I-526E decreased by 10,773 or -73 percent 
compared to Form I-526 in FY 2016/2017. Estimated workload for Form I-
924 decreased by 338 or -85 percent. Overall, EB-5 actual receipts 
declined consistently year-over-year from FY 2016 to FY 2020. See Table 
21, EB-5 Receipts from FY 2016 to FY 2020. However, completion rates 
increased. For example, the estimated completion rate for Form I-526 
was 6.5 hours in the FY 2016/2017 fee rule. See 81 FR 26925. In the FY 
2022/2023 fee review, USCIS estimates that the completion rate for 
Forms I-526 and I-526E is 20.69 hours, a 14.19 hour or 218 percent 
increase. The estimated completion rate for Form I-924 was 40 hours in 
the current fee structure. Id. In the FY 2022/2023 fee review, USCIS is 
using the methodology for Forms I-924 and I-924A and applying it to 
Forms I-956 and I-956G respectively. USCIS estimates that the 
completion rate for Form I-956 (formerly Form I-924) is 108.50 hours, a 
68.50 hour or 171 percent increase. The work associated with Form I-956 
adjudications includes reaffirmations and terminations; therefore, the 
time requirements associated with these subsequent actions is factored 
into the overall completion rate for Form I-956. The number of approved 
regional centers decreased from 2016 to 2020 by over 200, significantly 
increasing the number of hours spent on the terminations of those 
regional centers. Increased work associated with terminations 
contributed to the overall increase in the completion rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \310\ See section V.B, Methodology, earlier in this preamble for 
workload volumes and completion rates in the FY 2022/2023 fee 
review.
    \311\ Id.

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

[[Page 510]]

    IPO staffing did not decrease from the levels estimated in the FY 
2016/2017 fee rule despite lower workload volumes because the amount of 
work required per form increased (in other words, completion rates 
increased) and USCIS increased the number of other positions to 
strengthen the program integrity, resulting in increased staffing 
overall. In some cases, there was adjudicative work that was required 
even if there was no petition and associated filing fee filed. In 
addition to reviewing Form I-956G (formerly Form I-924A), USCIS also 
incurs costs associated with regional centers that fail to file Form I-
956G. USCIS will sanction or terminate the designation of a regional 
center in the program if a regional center fails to submit information 
annually. See INA section 203(b)(5)(G), 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(5)(G). 
Therefore, USCIS must take adjudicative action on regional centers that 
fail to file this form, and there is a cost involved even if no fee is 
filed to cover the cost.
    The reduced EB-5 workload volume contributes to significantly 
higher fee-paying unit costs in the ABC model because there are fewer 
paying customers from whom USCIS recovers the cost of processing the 
EB-5 workloads. As discussed in earlier in this preamble, DHS bases 
most proposed fees on fee-paying unit costs from the ABC model. See 
section V.B.3., Assessing Proposed fees. In a separate rulemaking, DHS 
may reevaluate EB-5 proposed fees to meet the timely processing goals 
of Public Law 117-103. See Public Law 117-103 at div. BB, sec. 106.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.061

    The proposed fees represent consistent application of the 
methodology discussed earlier in this preamble. In each case, the EB-5 
proposed fees are based on the ABC model outputs. As explained earlier 
in the preamble, the fees for benefit requests with higher fee-paying 
volume or model outputs, such as the EB-5 forms, are set higher than 
the model outputs via the process called cost reallocation. See section 
V.B.3. Consistent with the practice and the treatment of similar forms 
in this proposed rule, the proposed fees for the EB-5 forms exceed the 
estimated full cost of adjudication because, under the model, the fees 
include amounts needed to recover the costs associated with processing 
other workloads where fees are insufficient to recover full cost. Id. 
DHS may reevaluate EB-5 proposed fees to meet the additional fee 
guidelines of EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022 sec. 106(c). Under 
the ability-to-pay principle, those who are more capable of bearing the 
burden of fees should pay more for a service than those with less 
ability to pay. The requirements of immigrant investor program indicate 
that immigrant investors and regional centers have the ability-to-pay 
more than most USCIS customers. In addition, compared to the amount of 
capital required and the required investment levels for an immigrant 
investor, the amount of the USCIS fees are an insignificant amount. 
Thus, DHS proposes that the fee amounts indicated by the ABC full cost 
recovery model for the four immigrant investor forms are not capped or 
decreased. DHS believes that immigrant investors and regional centers 
are able to pay the fees and the requirements for financial wherewithal 
in the program are inconsistent with shifting its costs to other 
requests and requiring others to subsidize its share of the costs of 
USCIS. While the proposed EB-5 fees are some of the highest on the fee 
schedule, the revenue from them is still a small part of the total 
revenue forecast because the volumes are low. See Table 22. The EB-5 
average annual revenue forecast is approximately $80.7 million for the 
FY 2022/2023 period. As such, the EB-5 revenue forecast is only 
approximately 2 percent of the total average annual FY 2022/2023 
revenue forecast with the proposed fees.

[[Page 511]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.062

P. Genealogy and Records

1. Genealogy Search and Records Requests
    DHS revised the regulations governing genealogical research 
requests in the 2020 fee rule. See 85 FR 46915. The changes were 
intended to allow USCIS to send pre-existing digital records as part of 
a response to requestors who have filed Form G-1041, Genealogy Index 
Search Request, and otherwise help USCIS improve genealogy processes. 
DHS also proposed a fee for a Genealogy Index Search Request, Form G-
1041, of $240, and for a Genealogy Records Request, Form G-1041A, of 
$385. 84 FR 62362. Numerous commenters generally opposed increasing 
fees for genealogy search and records requests for various reasons. 85 
FR 46834. For the 2020 final rule, USCIS refined the methodology used 
to estimate genealogy program costs and DHS established a fee for Form 
G-1041 when filed online as $160 and $170 when filed on paper. DHS 
established a fee for Form G-1041A when filed online as $255 and $265 
when filed by paper. These fees were enjoined and not implemented.
    The FY 2022/2023 IEFA fee review has determined that USCIS needs 
additional funds for its Genealogy Search and Records Requests program. 
Therefore, DHS again proposes changes to the genealogy search and 
request program. These proposals will allow USCIS to send pre-existing 
digital records as part of a response to requestors who have filed Form 
G-1041, Genealogy Index Search Request, recover the costs of the 
genealogy program, and may otherwise help USCIS improve genealogy 
processes.
    Congress provided specific authority for establishing USCIS 
genealogy program fees. See INA sec. 286(t), 8 U.S.C. 1356(t). The 
statute requires that genealogy program fees be deposited into the IEFA 
and provides 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. USCIS does not receive 
appropriations for genealogy workloads, and genealogy revenue does not 
augment Government tax revenue. USCIS only receives appropriations for 
E-Verify, the Citizenship and Integration Grant Program, and other 
specific purposes, as explained in section III.B. of this preamble.
    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 FOIA request 
workload, which resulted in delays. See Establishment of a Genealogy 
Program, 71 FR 20357 (Apr. 20, 2006) (proposed rule). Requestors use 
the USCIS website \312\ 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) (Oct. 1, 2020). 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) (Oct. 1, 
2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \312\ USCIS, ``Genealogy,'' available at https://www.uscis.gov/records/genealogy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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. See 81 FR 73304. DHS set both genealogy search and records 
requests fees at $65. Id. At the time, genealogy fees were insufficient 
to cover the full costs of the genealogy program. DHS 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 more than ten years of operating the genealogy program, DHS 
proposes to make several changes to the process. Ultimately, DHS 
expects these changes may allow USCIS to provide genealogy search 
results and historic records more quickly when pre-existing digital 
records exist.
    First, 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/records/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 pre-existing 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,

[[Page 512]]

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 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, via email in response to the initial search 
request. See proposed 8 CFR 103.40(f). If only paper copies of the 
records exist, or if the requestor wants a physical copy of the 
digitized record, then the requestor must follow the current process 
and file Form G-1041A. Consistent with current practices, requestors 
must still pay the Form G-1041A request fee to request a paper record. 
In short, the proposal may allow some customers to file a single search 
request with a single fee and still receive the genealogy information 
that they requested. USCIS forecasts that records requests may be 
approximately 30 percent of index search requests. See section V.B.1. 
of this preamble for immigration benefit request volumes. Meaning, for 
approximately 70 percent of index searches, USCIS may provide 
electronic copies of digital records, USCIS may not identify any 
records, or customers may not follow-up with a records request for 
hardcopies.
    Lastly, DHS proposes to change the genealogy fees to reflect these 
operational changes and recover the full cost of providing genealogical 
services. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(E) and (F) (Oct. 1, 2020); proposed 
8 CFR 106.2(c)(1) and (2). USCIS estimated the workload volume based on 
these proposed changes and historic information. USCIS must estimate 
the costs of the genealogy program because it does not have a discrete 
genealogy program operating budget. Maintaining a separate genealogy 
program budget would be administratively burdensome because it is such 
a small portion of USCIS staffing, as explained later in this section.
    The proposed fees are based on results from the same ABC model used 
to calculate other immigration benefit request fees proposed in this 
NPRM. However, the proposed increase reflects changes in USCIS' 
methodology for estimating the costs of the genealogy program to 
improve the accuracy of its estimates. In the FY 2016/2017 fee rule, 
DHS estimated the costs of the genealogy program indirectly using 
projected volumes and other information. See 81 FR 26919. It did not 
separate genealogy from the other costs related to the division that 
handles genealogy, FOIA, and similar USCIS workloads. Id. This 
methodology underestimated the total cost to USCIS of processing 
genealogy requests by not fully recognizing costs associated with the 
staff required to process genealogical requests. Therefore, other fees 
have been funding a portion of the costs of the genealogy program, and 
DHS proposes to correct that.
    In the 2020 fee rule, USCIS created a new activity for this 
workload, called Research Genealogy, in the ABC model.\313\ Previous 
fee reviews captured this work as part of the Records Management 
activity. The same office that researches genealogy requests, the 
National Records Center (NRC), also performs other functions, such as 
FOIA operations, retrieving, storing, and moving files. To improve 
efficiency and decrease wait times for USCIS Genealogy Program 
customers, processing of USCIS genealogy requests transitioned from 
Washington, DC, to USCIS NRC in Lee's Summit, Missouri. This change 
enabled USCIS to revise its cost estimation methodology to incorporate 
a proportional share of the NRC's operating costs based on the staff 
devoted to the genealogy program. USCIS estimates that there are 
approximately 6 genealogy positions out of the total 24,266 positions 
in the fee review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \313\ The current FY 2022/2023 fee review continues to use this 
new activity. See the supporting documentation accompanying this 
proposed rule for more information on the activities in the ABC 
model.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    USCIS used historical 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. The completion rates in the 2020 fee 
rule documentation did not reflect the workload transfer. Updated data 
that reflects the change were used for this fee review and shows that 
completion rates decreased.
    In addition to genealogy staffing, USCIS also incurs overhead costs 
associated with storing and managing genealogy records, including the 
cost of facilities and information technology. The projected costs 
included a portion of these overhead costs. The paper filing fee 
includes a portion of lockbox costs for genealogy requests filed on 
paper. Requests filed online do not include lockbox costs. USCIS 
estimates that over 90 percent of genealogy customers may file online.
    The proposed fees for Form G-1041 are $100 for online and $120 for 
paper filing. The proposed fees for Form G-1041A are $240 for online 
and $260 for paper filing. See Table 23 for a summary of current and 
proposed genealogy fees. As explained earlier in this section, the 
proposal may allow some customers to file a single search request with 
a single fee and still receive the genealogy information that they 
requested. The proposal to include pre-existing digital records, if 
they exist, via email in response to the initial search request would 
also be more efficient than the current process, as described earlier 
in this section. USCIS estimates that genealogy fees may provide $1.9 
million in revenue or approximately 0.04 percent of the USCIS total 
$5,163.7 million in revenue from the proposed fee structure.

[[Page 513]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.063

2. Request for a Certificate of Non-Existence
    USCIS allows individuals to request a Certificate of Non-Existence 
to document that USCIS has no records indicating that an individual 
became a naturalized citizen of the United States. See 8 CFR 103.7(f) 
(Oct. 1, 2020) (stating, ``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.''). This service 
is often used by individuals gathering genealogical records to claim 
the citizenship of another nation. Historically, USCIS has operated the 
Certificate of Non-Existence request process informally and at no cost 
to individuals requesting a Certificate. USCIS has now proposed to 
create USCIS Form G-1566, Request for a Certificate of Non-Existence to 
enable customers to request the Certificate. A Request for a 
Certificate of Non-Existence is mailed to and processed at the NRC. 
USCIS is currently seeking public comment and OMB approval for creation 
of Form G-1566, Request for a Certificate of Non-Existence, in 
compliance with the requirements of the PRA. See 86 FR 68680 (December 
3, 2021) (requesting public comments on the information collection 
instrument for 30 days).\314\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \314\ See Notice by USCIS, Agency Information Collection 
Activities; New Collection: Request for a Certificate of Non-
Existence, available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/12/03/2021-26245/agency-information-collection-activities-new-collection-request-for-a-certificate-of-non-existence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS proposes a fee of $330 for a request for a Certificate of Non-
Existence. DHS calculated the fee to recover the estimated full cost of 
processing these requests. If finalized, the fee will be established in 
this rule and will be required for submission of Form G-1566 if it is 
approved before this rule takes effect. If the form is not approved 
before this rule is to take effect, the fee will be due with the 
submission of a non-form request until the form is prescribed as 
provided in 8 CFR 299.1. DHS proposes this fee consistent with the full 
cost recovery model used for this rule to generate revenue to mitigate 
the need for other fee payers to fund the costs of providing 
certificates.
    The proposed fee for a request for a Certificate of Non-Existence 
is based on the same ABC model used to calculate the other proposed 
fees. USCIS created a new activity for this workload, called Certify 
Nonexistence, in the ABC model. Similar to the genealogy fee, previous 
fee reviews captured this work as part of the Records Management 
activity. See the supporting documentation accompanying this proposed 
rule for more information on the activities in the ABC model. 
Additionally, USCIS used subject matter expert input to determine a 
completion rate for reviewing and responding to requests for a 
Certificate of Non-Existence. Therefore, the proposed fee represents 
the average staff time required to complete a request, similar to most 
other fees proposed in this rule. The fee DHS proposes does not reflect 
cost reallocation from other non-paying workloads to processing 
requests for a Certificate of Non-Existence, because DHS determined 
that including such costs would disproportionately affect the small 
number of requestors.

Q. Fees Shared by CBP and USCIS

    CBP shares the workload with USCIS in adjudicating 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 and CBP each keep the revenue for the applications that they 
adjudicate. Tables 20 and 21 summarize CBP and USCIS information for 
these shared workloads. Table 24 provides revenue information for both 
DHS components. CBP provided revenue collections from FY 2014 to FY 
2020 for these immigration benefit requests. Travel restrictions in FY 
2020 likely lowered revenue collections. DHS believes that pre-pandemic 
data is likely to be more representative of reasonable expectations for 
FY 2022 and FY 2023 and so DHS decided to use FY 2019 amounts to 
reflect costs and revenue before the pandemic. USCIS divided the

[[Page 514]]

revenue collections by the fee for each immigration benefit request to 
derive the fee-paying volume for each immigration benefit request. CBP 
did not provide total workload counts for these immigration benefit 
requests. Table 24 summarizes the USCIS and CBP revenue collections, 
current fees, and fee-paying actuals.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.064

    DHS proposes to move to a single fee for each of these four 
immigration benefit requests. The proposed fee is the same whether CBP 
or USCIS adjudicates the application. To calculate the proposed fees 
for these four forms, DHS combined the estimated cost and volume 
information for these applications that both USCIS and CBP adjudicate. 
DHS adds together the fee-paying receipt and cost data for both 
components, as shown in Table 25, when calculating overall estimated 
costs and projected receipts. USCIS calculated proposed fees using the 
same methodology as other proposed fees and then added information from 
CBP into the USCIS fee schedule. CBP estimated the total cost for Forms 
I-192 and I-193 in FY 2019. As stated earlier, DHS used FY 2019 CBP 
data because it is likely more representative of a typical year than 
more recent data. CBP did not estimate the total cost of Forms I-212 or 
I-824 in FY 2019. Based on CBP revenue collections in Table 24, fee-
paying receipts for Forms I-212 and I-824 appear to be very low. USCIS 
incorporated the total costs and derived fee-paying volume for the 
respective CBP workloads into the USCIS fee schedule and added the CBP 
estimated costs to the USCIS estimated total cost from the ABC model. 
USCIS added the CBP-derived fee-paying volume to the USCIS fee-paying 
volume estimates. We divided the combined total cost by the combined 
total fee-paying volumes for these immigration benefits. Table 25 
details the estimated cost data, fee-paying receipts, fee-paying unit 
cost, and proposed fees for combined USCIS and CBP workloads.

[[Page 515]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.065

    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. DHS used the combined CBP and USCIS fee-paying unit cost to 
calculate the proposed fees. DHS proposes to limit the fee increases 
for Forms I-192 and I-193. See section V.B.3 for information on how DHS 
assesses fees. The proposed fees for Forms I-212 and I-824 would 
recover full cost. Under this proposal, CBP and USCIS will each 
continue to keep the revenue that they collect for these fees.

R. 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 Public Law 105-100 (NACARA)). The IEFA fees 
for this application have not changed since 2005. The proposed fee 
remains less than USCIS' estimated costs associated with adjudicating 
the application. Additionally, DHS proposes to combine the current 
multiple fees into a single Form I-881 fee because we have no data that 
supports limiting the amount charged to a family.
    INS implemented two fees for this benefit request in 1999. See 63 
FR 64895 (Nov. 24, 1998) (proposed rule) and 64 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 27867-27868. 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 2020, Form I-881 fees generated $107,640 in IEFA revenue. 
Approximately 53 percent of applicants paid the $285 fee. See Table 26. 
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 because it lacks the authority to 
change DOJ fees.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.066


[[Page 516]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.067

    In prior fee rules, DHS has not changed the Form I-881 fees. See 72 
FR 29854, 75 FR 58964, and 75 FR 73312. DHS 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 $340 fee for any Form I-881 filed with USCIS. 
See proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(54). DHS estimated the fee-paying unit cost 
(model output) for Form I-881 is $2,382. USCIS forecasts an average of 
385 annual Form I-881 receipts in the FY 2022/2023 biennial period. 
Given the low volume and high model output, DHS proposes a fee that is 
far less than the estimated cost to adjudicate the form. DHS believes 
that the fee that the ABC model calculates for this form would be 
overly burdensome and could result in an eligible applicant being 
unable to file a request. Considering both its affordability and that 
the estimated volume is so small, recovering full cost for this 
workload would not significantly affect other fees. USCIS does not 
track the different level of effort required to adjudicate Form I-881 
applications filed by an individual compared to a family. However, 
because DHS is proposing a fee that is only 14 percent of the relative 
cost to USCIS to adjudicate the from, DHS is not providing a multiple 
filing discount to applicants in the same family who file their Form I-
881 simultaneously.

S. 9-11 Response and Biometric Entry-Exit Fee for H-1B and L-1 
Nonimmigrant Workers (Pub. L. 114-113 Fees)

    In section 402(g) of Div. O of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 
2016 (Pub. L.114-113) \315\ enacted December 18, 2015, Congress 
required the submission of an additional fee of $4,000 for certain H-1B 
petitions and $4,500 for certain L-1A and L-1B petitions. The language 
in Public Law 114-113 is ambiguous and, as a result, DHS had to 
determine whether the fee applied to all extension petitions by covered 
employers, or just those for which the fraud fee was also charged 
(extension of stay with change of employer). DHS interpreted the Public 
Law 114-113 fee to apply only when the fraud fee, described in INA sec. 
214(c)(12), 8 U.S.C. 1184(c)(12), is also required and issued guidance 
accordingly. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(III) and (JJJ) (Oct. 1, 2020). 
However, in the 2020 fee rule, DHS revisited the issue and interpreted 
Public Law 114-113 fee as applying to all extension of stay petitions 
even when the fraud fee is not applicable. DHS still believes that the 
language in the subject statute is ambiguous and could be interpreted 
as provided in the 2020 fee rule. However, DHS is not including the 9-
11 Response and Biometric Entry-Exit Fees for H-1B and L-1 Nonimmigrant 
Workers in this rulemaking. Thus, 8 CFR 106.2(c)(7) and (8) as codified 
effective October 2, 2020, are proposed to be revised in this 
rulemaking with the text that existed immediately before the 2020 fee 
rule. See proposed 8 CFR 106.2(c)(8) and (9) (setting out the text of 8 
CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(III) and (JJJ) as of October 1, 2020, except 
providing that the fee is scheduled to end on September 30, 2027, as 
required by section 30203 of Public Law 115-123 (Feb. 9, 2018)). DHS 
may address the 9-11 Response and Biometric Entry-Exit Fees for H-1B 
and L-1 Nonimmigrant Workers in a separate rulemaking in the future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \315\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

T. Adjusting USCIS Fees for Inflation

    DHS is proposing to codify a provision that will authorize it to 
adjust the fees prescribed in proposed 8 CFR 106.2 by the rate of 
inflation. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(c). Before DHS removed it with the 2020 
fee rule, 8 CFR 103.7(b)(3)(Oct. 1, 2020) provided that DHS may adjust 
USCIS immigration benefit fees annually by publication of an inflation 
adjustment notice in the Federal Register. The adjustment was based on 
Federal employee salary inflation figures issued by the Office of 
Management and Budget. Id. DHS last adjusted fees by inflation in 2005. 
See, 70 FR 56182 (Sept. 26, 2005). In the 2020 fee rule, DHS removed 
that provision for a number of reasons. First, an agency cannot publish 
a document in the Notices category of the Federal Register that 
provides that regulated parties ignore the CFR and follow what the 
Notice provides instead. That violates the Federal Register Act, 44 
U.S.C. 1510, and its implementing regulations, 1 CFR part 21. Thus, 8 
CFR 103.7(b)(3) did not provide the authorization for which it was 
intended. In addition, DHS felt that adjusting USCIS fees by inflation 
or social security cost of living adjustments would be insufficient to 
recover the full cost of providing adjudication and naturalization 
services. See 85 FR 46867.
    DHS has reconsidered the value of codifying an inflationary 
adjustment provision. Regardless of the CFO Act requirements, and 
although DHS has completed its biennial fee reviews as required, the 
time required to propose and finalize new full cost recovery fee 
schedules does not allow DHS to make timely adjustments to USCIS fees 
to keep up with the effects of changes in immigration laws, policy, or 
the costs of services. DHS has not calculated what the effects of an 
inflation adjustment of fees in intervening years between fee rules 
would have been. However, while we assume that inflationary adjustments 
would not have provided USCIS with sufficient revenue to fully cover 
costs, we think intermittent adjustments would have ameliorated the 
size of fee adjustments when they were made via rulemaking.
    DHS proposes to use the Consumer Price Index for All Urban 
Consumers (CPI-U), as published by the U.S. Department of Labor, U.S. 
Bureau of Labor Statistics, as the inflation index for these fee 
adjustments.\316\ Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(c). In recognition of the rapid 
growth in the size of transfers between a growing number of 
stakeholders affected by the past three fee rules, adjusting USCIS fees 
for inflation as measured by the CPI-U may insure future revenues 
against the gradual erosion of real fee revenue dollars in the event 
that future rulemakings are

[[Page 517]]

slowed by intensive, careful consideration of complex competing 
interests and impacts. Consistent with the FPG, this approach may also 
base fees on the constant-dollar value to consumers, generally, rather 
than more opaque estimates of Government costs or the salaries of 
Federal employees. Finally, using the CPI-U as our inflation index for 
all fees is consistent with various statutes that have provided that 
USCIS will use the CPI to adjust certain fees. See, e.g., Public Law 
106-553, App. B, tit. I, sec. 112, 114 Stat. 2762, 2762A-68 (Dec. 21, 
2000) (premium processing fee adjustment); 48 U.S.C. 1806(a)(6)(A)(ii) 
(Authority to adjust the CNMI education fee for inflation), and; 8 
U.S.C. 1356(u)(3)(C) (adjustment of premium processing fees on a 
biennial basis).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \316\ See, Consumer Price Index, at https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.toc.htm (last viewed July 27, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The impacts of such an adjustment would be analyzed in a future 
rule should DHS decide to use this proposed authority. In such a case, 
the inflation adjusted fees may be higher or lower than proposed here. 
For example and as a point of comparison only, if DHS adjusted the Form 
N-400 and biometric services fee by inflation as of March 22, 2022, 
then the inflation-adjusted fees would be at least $865, $140 more than 
the current fees for Form N-400 of $725 ($640 + $85), and $105 more 
than the proposed N-400 fee of $760, but less than the fee set in the 
2020 fee rule of $1,170.\317\ Other inflation adjusted fees, such as 
those for Forms I-129 or I-485, would likely be less than the fees 
proposed in this rule. Future inflation-based fee increases would not 
include policy changes. They would only adjust fees. It is unlikely 
that DHS would pursue an inflation-based fee adjustment until FY 2025 
or at least one year after DHS finalizes the fees it proposes in this 
rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \317\ Current fees became effective on Dec. 23, 2016. See 81 FR 
73292. The current fees for Form N-400 ($640) and biometric services 
($85) total $725 for most applicants. The consumer price index for 
all urban consumers (CPI-U) was 241.432 in Dec. 2016 and 289.109 in 
Mar. 2022. The change in the index between these two periods was 
47.68 or 19.75 percent. See U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of 
Labor Statistics, All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) tables, available at 
https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUUR0000SA0. The inflation adjusted 
amounts using this example would be as follows: N-400: $640 
multiplied by 1.1975, which is approximately $766.38; biometric 
services fee: $85 multiplied by 1.1975, which is approximately 
$101.79. DHS rounds fees to the nearest $5. Rounded to the nearest 
$5, the inflation adjusted fees would be $765 and $100, totaling 
$865. The proposed fee for Form N-400 (including the cost of 
biometric services) is $760, which is $35 or 5 percent more than the 
total current fees of $725 for Form N-400 and biometric services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

U. Miscellaneous Technical and Procedural Changes

    DHS proposes several technical or procedural changes. This rule 
proposes to move the fee regulations for USCIS to a separate part of 
chapter I of title 8 of the CFR. It moves them from 8 CFR part 103 to 8 
CFR part 106 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 proposed rule has 
reorganized and reworded some sections to improve readability. However, 
as noted earlier in this preamble, DHS is proposing to adopt the 
changes made by the 2020 fee rule as proposed for revision or 
republication in this rule.
    DHS also proposes to republish the amended title of 8 CFR part 103 
to make it more descriptive of its contents. See proposed republished 8 
CFR part 103. The title of part 103 before October 2, 2020, was 
``Immigration Benefits; Biometric Requirements; Availability of 
Records.'' Part 103 contains several significant requirements for 
filing requests, forms, and documents with USCIS, especially in 8 CFR 
103.2, which should be made clearer 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 and republishing a severability 
provision in new 8 CFR part 106. As stated repeatedly in this preamble, 
the fees DHS is proposing in this rule are essential to USCIS being 
able to fund its operations without further deterioration of its 
services. While all of the proposed fees and other changes in this rule 
are needed to ensure adequate resources, partially achieving the 
objectives of this rule is preferable to achieving none of them. DHS 
believes that some of the provisions of each new part can function 
sensibly independent of other provisions. As explained in this 
preamble, ABC and the full cost recovery fee model that DHS uses to 
calculate the fees in this rule results in most of the fees being 
dependent on policy decisions that affect the level of other fees. For 
example, when DHS shifts the cost of benefit request fees due to policy 
considerations, exempts requests from fees, or if fees are capped by 
law, most other fees must/then increase to compensate to recover full 
cost. On the other hand, certain fees, like the Asylum Program Fee and 
genealogy fees, could be removed entirely without affecting all other 
fees generally, although they would reduce USCIS projected revenue or 
carryover balances. For example, absent the Asylum Program Fee or 
appropriations, USCIS may continue to implement the Asylum Processing 
IFR, perhaps at a reduced level. Such a funding decision may be similar 
to when USCIS anticipated appropriations to fund RAIO, SAVE, and the 
Office of Citizenship when it finalized fees in the FY 2010/2011 fee 
rule. See 75 FR 58961, 58966. When appropriations resources did not 
fully materialize, USCIS used other fee revenue to support these 
programs in the time between the FY 2010/2011 fee rule and the FY 2016/
2017 fee rule. See 81 FR 26910-26912. If Congress provides full or 
partial appropriations to fund the Asylum Processing IFR, then DHS may 
be able to remove or reduce the proposed $600 Asylum Program Fee in a 
final rule. If a court ruling were to enjoin the Asylum Processing IFR 
or the Asylum Program Fee, then other USCIS operations could continue 
to benefit from the increased revenue from other proposed fees while 
halting or reducing implementation of the Asylum Processing IFR. 
Therefore, 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 should a 
provision be stricken. See proposed republished 8 CFR 106.6.

IX. Proposed Fee Adjustments to IEFA Immigrant Benefits

    At current fee levels, projected USCIS costs for FY 2022 and FY 
2023 exceed projected revenue by an average of $1,262.3 million each 
year. See Table 6, IEFA Non-Premium Cost and Revenue Comparison. 
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 27 outlines total IEFA 
costs by activity. See the supporting documentation in the docket of 
this rulemaking for more information on the ABC model, activities, and 
results described in this section. While not an activity, the table 
lists the Asylum Processing IFR as a separate row to be transparent.

[[Page 518]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.068

    Next, the ABC model distributes activity costs to immigration 
benefit requests. Each total cost result is based on the resources, 
activities, and various drivers which contribute to the estimated cost 
of its completion. The ABC model estimates total cost before 
calculating unit costs. For total cost by activity as unit costs, see 
Appendix VIII of the supporting documentation included in this docket. 
Table 28 summarizes total cost estimates by immigration benefit request 
based on the ABC model results. As explained earlier in the preamble, 
the ABC model excludes costs for TPS and DACA. The table includes 
benefit requests without fees. This table includes USCIS costs in the 
2-year average for FY 2022/2023. It also includes CBP costs; as such, 
the total in Table 28 is higher than in Table 27. See Table 25 in 
section VIII.Q. for CBP total costs separately.

[[Page 519]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.069


[[Page 520]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.070


[[Page 521]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.071


[[Page 522]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.072

    Table 29 depicts the current and proposed USCIS fees for 
immigration benefit requests and biometric services. Current USCIS fees 
are available to the public as part of the current Form G-1055, Fee 
Schedule, available at https://

[[Page 523]]

www.uscis.gov/g-1055; individual web pages for each form are available 
from https://www.uscis.gov/forms/all-forms; and the USCIS Fee 
Calculator is available at https://www.uscis.gov/feecalculator. In 
addition, the proposed fees are available in the draft version of Form 
G-1055 as part of the docket for this rulemaking. For a more detailed 
description of the basis for the changes described in this table, see 
Appendix Table 3 in the supporting documentation accompanying this 
proposed rule. See Table 1 in the Executive Summary of this preamble 
for a comparison of current and proposed fees that includes additional 
contributing factors, like the proposal to remove the separate 
biometric services fee in most cases. Table 1 may more accurately 
reflect how the proposed fees affect users.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.073


[[Page 524]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.074


[[Page 525]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.075


[[Page 526]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.076


[[Page 527]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.077


[[Page 528]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.078

A. Impact of Fees

    For some immigration benefits and services, fees are increasing 
substantially. DHS recognizes that this may be challenging for some 
customers and stakeholders, especially those that may be taking actions 
or making decisions with the expectation that USCIS fees remain 
unchanged or increase more modestly. DHS acknowledges that applicants 
and petitioners may face additional difficulties in paying the fees, 
and may be required to request a fee waiver, save money longer to 
afford the fees, or resort to credit cards or borrowing to pursue their 
or their family members' immigration benefit. DHS has weighed these 
impacts and interests and considered alternatives to the proposals in 
this rule as described in this preamble. DHS examined each fee in this 
proposed rule and adjusted the fees computed by the fee model where 
appropriate and as discussed herein. It is DHS's view that the fees 
proposed represent the best balance of access, affordability, and 
benefits to the public interest while providing USCIS with the funding 
necessary to maintain adequate services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \318\ 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) (Oct. 1, 2020).
    \319\ 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) (Oct. 1, 2020).
    \320\ 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) (Oct. 1, 2020). EOIR has a separate $165 fee. 
DHS proposes no changes to the EOIR fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS notes that the success of this rulemaking in funding USCIS 
services depends on the fee-paying request filing volume meeting or 
exceeding the projections used in the fee model as described in section 
V.B.1.b of this preamble and the supporting documents. Many commenters 
on the FY 2020 Fee Rule stated that DHS was increasing USCIS fees to 
deter demand for immigration benefits and to discourage immigration in 
general. As stated earlier with regard to E.O. 14012, DHS is committed 
to encouraging access to immigration benefits. DHS appreciates the 
concerns of these earlier commenters, and sincerely hopes that this 
rulemaking does not discourage or impede individuals from obtaining the 
benefits for which they are eligible. This is true not only as a policy 
matter but as a practical necessity. If a USCIS fee rule were to cause 
a significant reduction in the demand for USCIS services in its 
administration of the legal immigration system, it would not meet DHS 
objectives and would cause USCIS serious fiscal problems. A large 
reduction in the number of immigration benefit filings on USCIS caused 
by the COVID-19 pandemic had enormous detrimental effects on the fiscal 
health of USCIS. Thus, taking any actions that could result in fewer 
requests being filed would be self-defeating to the purposes of a rule 
that adjusts USCIS fees.\321\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \321\ DHS has considered, but not identified any direct impacts 
on any state government because it is not projected to increase or 
decrease the number of immigrants who enter or leave the United 
States, or result in a shift of immigrants between or among the 
states. To the extent that states, cities, counties or municipal 
governments (or organizations that they maintain) serve as advocacy 
organizations or submit immigration benefit requests to USCIS, the 
impacts on those groups are addressed in the relevant sections of 
this rule or the supporting documentation in the docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS also acknowledges that USCIS fees and fee policies affect the 
operations of organizations that assist applicants and petitioners with 
the preparation and submission of USCIS benefit requests. Assistance 
organizations generally do not pay the fees that would be established 
by this rule (unless they independently apply to hire a foreign 
national employee), and aside from those organizations to which USCIS 
provides citizenship and integration grants, DHS has no role in 
regulating the functions of such groups. Nonetheless, this rule could 
indirectly affect the population and mix of the people who will want to 
avail themselves of the services of such organizations; thus, these 
groups may choose to obtain additional funding or alter their programs. 
As discussed earlier in this proposed rule, absent a fee increase, 
USCIS anticipates having insufficient resources to process its 
projected workload. Providing USCIS with the funding necessary to 
maintain adequate services would benefit our customers and stakeholders 
with more timely processing. After considering the impacts on the 
affected groups and the objectives of this proposed rule, DHS has 
decided to move forward with this rulemaking despite such groups 
choosing to adjust their business model to the proposed fees and 
policies.\322\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \322\ See section X.B.1 of this preamble for a discussion of the 
impacts of this rule on small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. USCIS Fiscal Health

    As a fee-funded agency, USCIS was directly and adversely affected 
by the global pandemic.\323\ This contrasts with congressionally 
appropriated agencies, whose budgets are not directly impacted by 
fluctuations in fee revenue. To address its deteriorating fiscal 
situation when the pandemic compelled a temporary closure of USCIS 
offices and led to a plunge in filing and fee receipts, USCIS tightened 
its budget while continuing mission critical operations.

[[Page 529]]

USCIS froze hiring and terminated contracts. See section V.A.2. of this 
preamble. When USCIS does not have the resources that it needs to meet 
its goals, processing times increase and the case processing backlog 
grows. Congress authorized an immediate increase in certain premium 
processing fees and gave USCIS wider authority to spend the premium 
processing revenue. See section III.D. of this preamble. More recently, 
USCIS received appropriations from Congress for processing workloads 
stemming from the agency backlog, refugee admissions, and Operation 
Allies Welcome. See section III.A. of this preamble. USCIS may continue 
to seek appropriations to supplement fee-funded operations. If USCIS is 
certain to receive appropriations to fund the FY 2023 refugee program 
at the time of the final rule, then USCIS may reduce the estimated 
budget requirements funded by IEFA fees accordingly. USCIS will still 
face resource challenges just in keeping pace with incoming receipts if 
its fees do not recover full costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \323\ See U.S. Citizenship and Immigr. Servs., U.S. Dep't of 
Homeland Security, Deputy Director for Policy Statement on USCIS' 
Fiscal Outlook, Available at https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/deputy-director-for-policy-statement-on-uscis-fiscal-outlook (last viewed Jun 25, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Planned Increases in Efficiency

    USCIS is pursuing efficiencies that will streamline the 
adjudication of immigration benefits along with increasing adjudication 
capacity without adding additional costs. It is important to note that 
these efficiencies are not included in this fee rule; however, they 
will be reflected in future fee rules. USCIS expects that future 
customers will be able to see the benefits in more quickly adjudicated 
cases. DHS plans to address the challenge of the large volume of 
pending cases and the associated growth in processing times by focusing 
the efforts of the USCIS workforce to process pending cases and by 
using policy and operational improvements to reduce both the number of 
pending cases and overall processing times.
    The USCIS Stabilization Act requires a five-year plan to (1) 
establish electronic filing procedures for all applications and 
petitions for immigration benefits, (2) accept electronic payment of 
fees at all filing locations, (3) issue correspondence, including 
decisions, requests for evidence, and notices of intent to deny, to 
immigration benefit requestors electronically, and (4) improve 
processing times for all immigration and naturalization benefit 
requests. See USCIS Stabilization Act, sec. 4103, Public Law 116-159 
(Oct. 1, 2020). USCIS provided an implementation plan to Congress and 
has begun moving from a primarily paper-based adjudication and 
correspondence to an electronic-based process.\324\ Throughout the 
implementation of the plan, USCIS expects that efficiencies through the 
use of electronic processing will improve future processing times. 
Since this is a five-year plan, the results of improving processing 
times may not be immediately evident as there are many interconnected 
processes associated with adjudicating immigration applications and 
petitions. As such, USCIS is not forecasting any financial efficiencies 
in this rule.\325\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \324\ See USCIS, ``Section 4103 Plan Pursuant to the Emergency 
Stopgap USCIS Stabilization Act: Fiscal Year 2021 Report to 
Congress'' (Sep. 7, 2021), https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/reports/SIGNED-Section-4103-FY2021-Report-9-7-21.pdf 
(last reviewed Jan. 19, 2022).
    \325\ If USCIS is able to clearly identify reductions in the 
costs of USCIS to be recovered under this rule between the proposed 
and final rule, DHS may consider those cost reductions to either 
reduce the proposed fees, or certain fees based on policy 
considerations, in the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are multiple factors that contribute to calculating the 
number of staff needed to adjudicate projected receipt volume. One such 
factor is the utilization rate, the amount of time throughout a fiscal 
year that an officer spends doing core adjudicative work. Further, 
USCIS has broken down utilization rates to ``manageable'' and ``un-
manageable'' time; un-manageable time includes weekends, Federal 
holidays, sick and annual leave, while manageable time includes 
meetings, reporting, training, and other non-adjudicative work an 
officer is required to complete. Since FY 2015, USCIS has seen 
utilization rates decrease to below 60 percent. Beginning in FY 2022, 
USCIS has set a target utilization rate of 60 percent. While this 
certainly provides for more adjudications without the need for 
additional staff, it is not factored into this rule because of a nearly 
year-long hiring freeze at USCIS, which ended in April of 2021. USCIS 
is working to staff back up. Given the efforts within USCIS to staff up 
for current vacancies, it is imprudent to account for efficiencies that 
USCIS may not realize, because a goal of this rule is to achieve full 
cost recovery. However, USCIS expects to achieve a 60 percent 
utilization rate as it reduces vacancies by hiring and training the new 
staff.
    While the volume of immigration benefit requests that USCIS 
receives has increased substantially in recent years, DHS recognizes 
that USCIS fees have increased at a higher rate than have the annual 
number of workload receipts that USCIS receives. In the short run, 
absent funding from other sources such as Congressional appropriations, 
USCIS must obtain the fees that will result from this proposed rule to 
maintain an acceptable level of service. In the longer term, USCIS is 
implementing several measures that are intended to assist in increasing 
efficiency and reducing costs.
    USCIS has examined our processes and begun making changes to 
improve efficiency and allow officers to devote more time to work that 
requires their expertise and provides the greatest value to the public. 
For example, USCIS has taken the following actions:
     Made interviews more efficient and effective by ensuring 
we are interviewing cases only where an interview will add appreciative 
value to the adjudication, and relying on officer judgment to decide 
when an interview is necessary to determine eligibility and 
admissibility and should not be waived.
     Eliminated the need for individuals who have applied for a 
change of status (COS) to F-1 student to apply to change or extend 
their nonimmigrant status while their initial F-1 COS application is 
pending.\326\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \326\ U.S. Citizenship and Immigr. Servs., U.S. Dep't of 
Homeland Security, Applicants for Change of Status to F-1 Student No 
Longer Need to Submit Subsequent Applications to `Bridge the Gap', 
https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/applicants-for-change-of-status-to-f-1-student-no-longer-need-to-submit-subsequent-applications-to 
(last viewed Dec 1, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Suspended the biometrics submission requirement for 
certain applicants filing Form I-539, Application To Extend/Change 
Nonimmigrant Status, requesting an extension of stay in or change of 
status to H-4, L-2, and E nonimmigrant status.\327\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \327\ U.S. Citizenship and Immigr. Servs., U.S. Dep't of 
Homeland Security, USCIS Temporarily Suspends Biometrics Requirement 
for Certain Form I-539 Applicants, https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-temporarily-suspends-biometrics-requirement-for-certain-form-i-539-applicants (last viewed Dec 1, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Allowed fingerprint and photograph reuse while ASC 
services and/or operations were at reduced capacity as a result of the 
COVID-19 pandemic and when there was no need for an in-person identity 
verification at an ASC.\328\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \328\ U.S. Citizenship and Immigr. Servs., U.S. Dep't of 
Homeland Security, USCIS to Continue Processing Applications for 
Employment Authorization Extension Requests Despite Application 
Support Center Closures, https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-to-continue-processing-applications-for-employment-authorization-extension-requests-despite (last viewed Dec 1, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Extended the time that receipt notices can be used to show 
evidence of status from 18 months to 24 months for petitioners who 
properly file Form I-751, Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence, 
or Form I-829, Petition by

[[Page 530]]

Investor to Remove Conditions on Permanent Resident Status.\329\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \329\ U.S. Citizenship and Immigr. Servs., U.S. Dep't of 
Homeland Security, USCIS Extends Evidence of Status for Conditional 
Permanent Residents to 24 Months with Pending Form I-751 or Form I-
829, https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/alerts/uscis-extends-evidence-of-status-for-conditional-permanent-residents-to-24-months-with-pending-form (last viewed Dec 1, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Returned to adjudicating asylum workload on a last-in-
first-out basis.\330\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \330\ USCIS, USCIS to Take Action to Address Asylum Backlog, 
available at https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/uscis-take-action-address-asylum-backlog (last updated Feb. 2, 2018). See 
section III.B of this preamble for a discussion of the FY 2022 
appropriation for backlog reduction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, USCIS has transitioned non-adjudicative work from 
adjudicators to other staff, has centralized the delivery of 
information services through the policies and processes in place to 
allow USCIS Contact Center, and is leveraging electronic processing and 
automation. Applicants, petitioners, and requestors also 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. Applicants may 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/ or calling the USCIS 
Contact Center at 1-800-375-5283.
    USCIS expects to improve the user experience as it continues to 
transition to online filing and electronic processing of immigration 
applications and petitions. With a new person-centric electronic case 
processing environment, USCIS will possess the data necessary to 
provide near-real-time processing updates on the status of a case and 
the time that has elapsed between actions for each individual case. 
This provides greater transparency to the public on how long it will 
take to process each case effective as it moves from stage to stage 
(for example, biometrics submission, interview, decision). In addition, 
USCIS has adjusted how it calculates and posts processing time 
information to improve the timeliness of such postings, and to achieve 
greater transparency. USCIS will continue to provide processing times 
in an accurate and transparent fashion.
    Finally, as discussed in section V.A.2.b., DHS proposes to fund 
with IEFA non-premium funds 1,127 staff positions currently supported 
by premium processing funds. Realigning the cost of these staff to non-
premium funds will free up an equivalent amount of premium processing 
funding for use by USCIS as it pursues additional investments in its 
online filing and electronic processing capabilities. Furthermore, 
these premium processing funds also may fund additional staff for 
backlog reduction efforts, which may result in reduced backlog sizes 
and decreased processing times.

X. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and Executive 
Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review)

    Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 and E.O. 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, and 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. 
The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), within the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), has designated this proposed 
rule a significant regulatory action that is economically significant 
under section 3(f)(1) of E.O. 12866. Accordingly, OIRA has reviewed 
this regulation.
    The fee adjustments, as well as changes to the forms and fee 
structures used by USCIS, would result in net costs, benefits, and 
transfer payments. For the 10-year period of analysis of the rule (FY 
2023 through FY 2032), DHS estimates the annualized net costs to the 
public would be $532,379,138 discounted at 3- and 7-percent. Estimated 
total net costs over 10 years would be $4,541,302,033 discounted at 3-
percent and $3,739,208,286 discounted at 7-percent.
    The proposed changes in this rule would also provide several 
benefits to DHS and applicants/petitioners seeking immigration 
benefits. For the Government, the primary benefits include reduced 
administrative burdens and fee processing errors, increased efficiency 
in the adjudicative process, and the ability to better assess the cost 
of providing services, which allows for better aligned fees in future 
regulations. The primary benefits to the applicants/petitioners include 
simplification of the fee payment process for some forms, elimination 
of the $30 returned check fee, USCIS' expansion of the electronic 
filing system to include more forms, and for many applicants, limited 
fee increases and additional fee exemptions to reduce fee burdens.
    Fee increases and other changes in this proposed rule would result 
in annualized transfer payments from applicants/petitioners to USCIS of 
approximately $1,612,133,742 discounted at both 3-percent and 7-
percent. The total 10-year transfer payments from applicants/
petitioners to USCIS of approximately $13,751,827,819 at a 3-percent 
discount rate and $11,322,952,792 at a 7-percent discount rate.
    Fee reductions and exemptions in this proposed rule would result in 
annualized transfer payments from USCIS to applicants/petitioners of 
approximately $116,372,429 discounted at both 3-percent and 7-percent. 
The total 10-year transfer payments from USCIS to applicants/
petitioners would be $992,680,424 at a 3-percent discount rate and 
$817,351,244 at a 7-percent discount rate.
    The annualized transfer payments from the Department of Defense 
(DoD) to USCIS would be approximately $222,145 at 3- and 7-percent 
discount rates. The total 10-year transfer payments from DoD to USCIS 
would be $1,894,942 at a 3-percent discount rate and $1,560,254 at a 7-
percent discount rate. These costs, transfers, and cost savings 
(qualitative benefits) are briefly described below in Table 30, and in 
more detail in a separate Regulatory Impact Analysis.
BILLING CODE 9111-97-P

[[Page 531]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.079


[[Page 532]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.080


[[Page 533]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.081


[[Page 534]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.082


[[Page 535]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.083


[[Page 536]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.084


[[Page 537]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.085


[[Page 538]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.086


[[Page 539]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.087


[[Page 540]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.088


[[Page 541]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.089


[[Page 542]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.090


[[Page 543]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.091


[[Page 544]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.092


[[Page 545]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.093

    DHS has prepared a full analysis according to E.O. 12866 and E.O. 
13563, which can be found in the docket for this rulemaking or by 
searching for RIN 1615-AC18 on www.regulations.gov. In addition to the 
impacts summarized above, Table 31 presents the accounting statement as 
required by Circular A-4.\333\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \331\ Combines both Forms I-526, Immigrant Petition by 
Standalone Investor and I-526E, Immigrant Petition by Regional 
Center Investor. USCIS revised Form I-526 and created Form I-526E as 
a result of the EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022.
    \332\ These fee exemptions do not impact eligibility for any 
particular form or when an individual may file the form. They are in 
addition to the forms listed under proposed 8 CFR 106.2 for which 
DHS proposes to codify that there is no fee.
    \333\ OMB Circular A-4 is available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/legacy_drupal_files/omb/circulars/A4/a-4.pdf (last viewed on September 22, 2022).

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

[[Page 546]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.094


[[Page 547]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.095

BILLING CODE 9111-97-C

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), as amended by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, requires 
Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on 
small businesses, small governmental jurisdictions, and small 
organizations during the development of their rules. The term ``small 
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations 
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their 
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 
50,000. DHS nonetheless welcomes comments regarding potential impacts 
on small entities, which DHS may consider as appropriate in a final 
rule.
    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. 
Below is a summary of the Small Entity Analysis (SEA). The complete 
detailed SEA \334\ is available in the rulemaking docket at https://www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \334\ DHS, USCIS Small Entity Analysis (SEA) for the USCIS Fee 
Schedule Proposed Rule dated May 24, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Individuals, rather than small entities, submit the majority of 
immigration and naturalization benefit applications and petitions, but 
this proposed 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 small entity 
analysis for this proposed rule: Petition for a Nonimmigrant

[[Page 548]]

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-956, and the Regional Center Annual Statement, Form I-956GA.
    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 I-140, I-910, or I-360. 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-956 or Form I-956G.
    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 IRFA 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 of the fee changes on the genealogy 
forms or the regional center forms on small entities.
1. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
a. A Description of the Reasons Why the Action by the Agency Is Being 
Considered
    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.
b. 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.
c. Description and, Where Feasible, an Estimate of the Number of Small 
Entities to Which the Proposed Rule Would Apply
    As noted above, below is a summary of the Small Entity Analysis 
(SEA). The complete detailed SEA is available in the rulemaking docket 
at https://www.regulations.gov. The SEA has a full analysis of all 
samples for each small entity form described below, in the Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis.
    Entities affected by this proposed 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; Form I-956 
(formerly Form I-924), Application for Regional Center Designation 
Under the EB-5 Regional Pilot Program, and Form I-956G (formerly Form 
I-924A), Regional Center Annual Statement. Annual numeric estimates of 
the small entities impacted by this fee increase total (in 
parentheses): Form I-129 (75,269 entities), Form I-140 (17,417 
entities), Form I-910 (382 entities), and Form I-360 (465 
entities).\335\ DHS was not able to determine the numbers of regional 
centers or genealogy requestors that would be considered small entities 
and; therefore, does not provide numeric estimates for Form I-956, Form 
I-956G, or Forms G-1041 and G-1041A.\336\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \335\ Calculation: 86,715 Form I-129 * 86.8 percent = 75,269 
small entities; 25,279 Form I-140 * 68.9 percent = 17,417 small 
entities; 428 Form I-910 * 89.3 percent = 382 small entities; 489 
Form I-360 * 95.0 percent = 465 small entities.
    \336\ Small entity estimates are calculated by multiplying the 
population (total annual receipts for the USCIS form) by the 
percentage of small entities, which are presented in subsequent 
sections of this analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 (SEA) 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, DHS is creating these new 
forms as stated above, as part of the EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 
2022. Since Form I-956/I-956G will be new forms and historical data 
does not exist; therefore, DHS will use historical data of the previous 
Form I-924, Application for Regional Center Designation Under the 
Immigrant Investor Program and Form I-924A, Annual Certification of 
Regional Center as a proxy for the analysis. The Form I-956 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-956 is 
also Form I-956G, 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.\337\ 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 who 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. DHS assumes genealogists have access to a 
computer and the internet. DHS is unable to estimate the online number 
of index searches and records requests; however, some will receive a 
reduced fee and cost savings, by filing online. Therefore, DHS does not 
currently have sufficient data to definitively assess the estimate of 
small entities for these requests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \337\ See Establishment of a Genealogy Program, 73 FR 28026 (May 
15, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, Form I-129
Funding the Asylum Program With Employer Form I-129 by Visa 
Classification Petition Fees
    In this proposed rule, DHS proposes a new Asylum Program Fee of 
$600 be paid by any employers who file either a Form I-129, Petition 
for a Nonimmigrant Worker, or Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien 
Worker. Proposed 8 CFR 106.2(c)(13). DHS has determined that the Asylum 
Program

[[Page 549]]

Fee is an effective way to shift some costs to requests that are 
generally submitted by petitioners who have more ability to pay, as 
opposed to shifting those costs to all other fee payers applications/
petitioners. DHS determined the Asylum Program Fee by calculating the 
amount that would need to be added to the fees for Form I-129 and Form 
I-140 to collect the Asylum Processing IFR estimated annual costs.\338\ 
The Asylum Program Fee may be used to fund part of the costs of 
administering the entire asylum program and would be due in addition to 
the fee those petitioners would pay under USCIS' standard costing and 
fee collection methodologies for their Form I-129 and Form I-140 
benefit requests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \338\ DHS acknowledges that, by using the middle of the range of 
costs, if actual costs are higher than that, then the USCIS fee 
schedule will be set at a level that is less than what will be 
required to recover all of the costs added by the Asylum Processing 
IFR, all other factors remaining the same. Estimated annual costs of 
the Asylum Processing IFR (mid-range estimate): FY 2022 total costs 
of $438.2 million plus FY 2023 total costs of $413.6 million equals 
$851.8. Average total costs of FY 2022/2023 equal $425.9 million. 
That figure represents the estimated costs that are directly 
attributable to the implementation of that rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS is not separating Form I-129 into multiple forms in this 
proposed rule as it did in the 2020 fee rule, but it is taking that 
action separately as a revision of the currently approved Form I-129 
information collection under the Paperwork Reduction Act. In this 
proposed rule, DHS proposes different fees for Form I-129 based on the 
nonimmigrant classification being requested in the petition, the number 
of beneficiaries on the petition, and, in some cases, according to 
whether the petition includes named or unnamed beneficiaries. 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. DHS proposes separate H-2A and H-2B fees for petitions with named 
workers and unnamed workers.
    In Table 32a, as stated above, the Asylum Program Fee of $600 would 
be included with each Form 1-129 Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker 
classification. It would apply to all fee-paying receipts for Forms I-
129, I-129CW, and I-140. For example, it would apply to all initial 
petitions, changes of status, and extensions of stay that use Form I-
129.
BILLING CODE 9111-9-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.096

    For petitioners filing Form I-129, DHS proposes increasing the fee 
filed for all worker types. The fee adjustments and percentage 
increases are summarized, shown in Table 32b. For petitioners filing 
Form I-129, DHS proposes increasing the fee filed for all worker types. 
The fee adjustments and percentage increases are summarized below. H-1B 
classification cap-subject petitions will include a $215 registration 
fee, an increase of $205 from the original $10 fee. Non-cap subject 
petitions (e.g., extension petitions or cap-exempt filer petitions) 
would not have to pay the registration fee. This registration fee is 
added to the fee increase and results in an overall increase for cap-
subject H-1B classification petitions of $920 ($215 + $705).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \339\ USCIS in this SEA used the H-1B, Petition for Nonimmigrant 
Worker: H-1B Classification fee of $1,595 = The fee includes the 
$1,380 proposed fee for H-1B Classification + $215 initial mandatory 
for cap-subject H-1B Registration Fee (current $10 to proposed $215; 
$205 dollar increase). This registration fee of $215 is for each 
registration, each registration is for a single beneficiary. 
Registrants or their representative are required to pay the $215 
non-refundable H-1B registration fee for each beneficiary before 
beng eligible to submit a registration for that beneficiary for the 
H-1B cap. The fee will not be refunded if the registration is not 
selected, withdrawn, or invalidated. H-1B cap-exempt petitions are 
not subject to registration and are not required to pay the 
registration fee of $215; therefore, those petitioners would only 
pay the $1,380 propoposed fee. See Registration Fee Requirement for 
Petitioners Seeking to File H-1B Petitions on Behalf of Cap Subject 
Aliens, Final Rule (84 FR 60307, November 8, 2019). Available at 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-11-08/pdf/2019-24292.pdf. See Regulatory Impact Analysis in the docket on 
regulations.gov, section (3)(H), Separate Fees, for Form I-129, 
Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, by Nonimmigrant Classification 
and Limit Petitions Where Multiple Beneficiaries are Permitted to 25 
Named Beneficiaries per Petition, Table 22 and 23, for further 
detail on the cap and non-cap H-1B petitions.

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

[[Page 550]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.097

    To calculate the impact of this increase, 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.\341\ H-1B 
classification cap-subject petitions will include a $215 registration 
fee, an increase of $205 from the original $10 fee. This registration 
fee is added to the fee increase and results in an overall increase for 
H-1B classification petitions of $920 ($215 + $705). Because entities 
can file multiple petitions, the analysis considers the number of 
petitions submitted by each entity. Based on the proposed fee increases 
for Form I-129, this will amount to average impacts on all 353 small 
entities with revenue data as summarized in Table 32c.\342\ DHS 
determined that 289 of the 353 entities searched were small entities 
based on sales revenue data, which were needed to estimate the economic 
impact of the proposed rule.\343\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \340\ USCIS in this SEA used the H-1B, Petition for Nonimmigrant 
Worker: H-1B Classification fee of $1,595 = The fee includes the 
$1,380 proposed fee for H-1B Classification + $215 initial mandatory 
for cap-subject H-1B Registration Fee (current $10 to proposed $215; 
$205 dollar increase). This registration fee of $215 is for each 
registration, each registration is for a single beneficiary. 
Registrants or their representative are required to pay the $215 
non-refundable H-1B registration fee for each beneficiary before 
beng eligible to submit a registration for that beneficiary for the 
H-1B cap. The fee will not be refunded if the registration is not 
selected, withdrawn, or invalidated. H-1B cap-exempt petitions are 
not subject to registration and are not required to pay the 
registration fee of $215; therefore, those petitioners would only 
pay the $1,380 propoposed fee. See Registration Fee Requirement for 
Petitioners Seeking to File H-1B Petitions on Behalf of Cap Subject 
Aliens, Final Rule (84 FR 60307, November 8, 2019). Available at 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-11-08/pdf/2019-24292.pdf. See Regulatory Impact Analysis in the docket on 
regulations.gov, section (3)(H), Separate Fees, for Form I-129, 
Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, by Nonimmigrant Classification 
and Limit Petitions Where Multiple Beneficiaries are Permitted to 25 
Named Beneficiaries per Petition, Table 22 and 23, for further 
detail on the cap and non-cap H-1B petitions.
    \341\ Total Impact to Entity = (Number of Petitions Submitted 
per Entity x $X Amount of Fee Increase)/Entity Sales Revenue. DHS 
used the lower end of the sales revenue range for those entities 
where ranges were provided.
    \342\ Random sample of small entities with revenue data selected 
to estimate impacts is described in Table 1 of the SEA.
    \343\ Entities that were considered small based on employee 
count with missing revenue data were excluded.

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

[[Page 551]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.098

BILLING CODE 9111-97-C
    Using a 12-month period of data on the number of Form I-129 
petitions filed from October 1, 2019, through September 31, 2020, 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 553,889 Form I-129 petitions, but 
only 86,715 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 business provider database--Data Axle--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 (SBA) size standards to the entities under 
examination.\344\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \344\ Office of Advocacy, SBA, Size Standards Table. Available 
at https://www.sba.gov/document/support--table-size-standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The method DHS used to conduct the SEA 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 86,715 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 86,715 unique entities that filed Form I-129 
petitions.
    Of the 650 searches for small entities that filed Form I-129 
petitions, 439 searches returned a successful match of a filing 
entity's name in one of the databases and 211 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, to 
prevent underestimating the number of small entities this rule would 
affect, DHS conservatively considers all of the non-matched entities as 
small entities for the purpose of this analysis. Among the 439 matches 
for Form I-129, DHS determined 353 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 564 of 650 entities as small entities that filed 
Form I-129 petitions, including combined non-matches (211), matches 
missing data (0), and small entity matches (353). Using the online 
databases mentioned above (Data Axle, Manta, Cortera, and Guidestar), 
the 0 matches missing data found in the databases lacked applicable 
revenue or employee count data.
    DHS determined that 564 of 650 (86.8 percent) of the entities 
filing Form I-129 petitions were small entities. Furthermore, DHS 
determined that 353 of the 650 entities searched were small entities 
based on sales revenue or employee data, which were needed to estimate 
the economic impact of the proposed rule. Since these 353 small 
entities were a subset of the random sample of 650 entity searches, 
they were considered statistically significant in the context of this 
research. 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.\345\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \345\ Total Economic Impact to Entity = (Number of Petitions 
Submitted per Entity * $X Amount of Fee Increase)/Entity Sales 
Revenue. DHS used the lower end of the sales revenue range for those 
entities where ranges were provided. Entities in the population 
without complete or with no EIN information (such as incomplete 
employee data or revenue information), were removed before the 
sample was selected for this analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Among the 353 matched small entities, 289 small entities had 
reported revenue data, 90.4 percent experienced

[[Page 552]]

an economic impact of less than 1 percent with the exception of 9.6 of 
the small entities. Those small entities with greater than 1 percent 
impact filed multiple petitions and had a low reported revenue. 
Therefore, these small entities may file fewer petitions as a result of 
this proposed rule. Depending on the immigration benefit request, the 
average impact on all 289 small entities with revenue data ranges from 
0.25 to 0.75 percent as shown above in Table 29c. In other words, no 
matter which version of the separated Form I-129 is applicable, the 
greatest economic impact proposed by this fee change was 19.04 percent 
and the smallest was 0.005 percent per entity. The average impact on 
all 289 small entities with revenue data was 0.57 percent.
Small Entity Classifications
    With an aggregated total of 564 out of a sample size of 650, DHS 
inferred that a majority, or 86.8 percent, of the entities filing Form 
I-129 petitions were small entities. Small entities filing petitions 
could be for-profit businesses or not-for-profit entities. To 
understand the extent to which not-for-profits were included in the 
samples selected for each form DHS categorized entities as for-profit 
or not-for-profit. The business data provider databases do not 
distinguish if entities are for-profit or not-for-profit, so DHS used 
the assumption that entities with NAICS codes 712 (Museums, Historical 
Sites, and Similar Institutions), 813 (Religious, Grantmaking, Civic, 
Professional, and Similar Organizations), and 6241 (Family Social 
Services) were not-for-profit. The NAICS code 611 (Educational 
Services) may have for-profit entities. Most of the sample consisted of 
small businesses when looked at by type of small entity. There are no 
small governmental jurisdictions in the sample and 38 small not-for-
profits.
2. Immigrant Petition for an Alien Worker, Form I-140
Funding the Asylum Program With Form I-140 Petition Fees
    As explained in section X.B.1., Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, 
Form I-129 Funding the Asylum Program with Employer Form I-129 by Visa 
Classification Petition Fees, DHS proposes a new Asylum Program Fee of 
$600 to be paid by any Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker. 
This Asylum Program Fee adds a fee for Form I-140 petitioners of $600 
while maintaining the fees other immigration benefit requestors that 
this rule proposes lower than would be proposed if the costs were 
spread among all other fee payers. For example, by charging the Asylum 
Program Fee to I-140 petitioners as well as the I-129 petitioners, it 
helps recover the cost of the Asylum Program work while minimizing fee 
increases on forms that do not recover full cost (Forms N-400, I-600, 
I-800, etc.), or without adding a fee to forms that currently have none 
(Forms I-589, I-590, I-914, I-918, etc.). If Forms I-129 and I-140 
recover more of those costs, then that means other forms need not 
recover as much. This results in lower proposed fees for certain forms, 
and others that recover more than full cost in this proposal. It would 
apply to all fee-paying receipts for Form I-140 and Form I-129.
    DHS proposes to increase the fee to file Immigrant Petition for an 
Alien Worker, Form I-140, from $700 to $715, an increase of $15 (2 
percent). The total proposed fee would include the $600 Asylum Program 
Fee for a total of $1,315, an overall increase of $615 (88 percent) per 
petition. Using a 12-month period of data on the number of Form I-140 
petitions filed from October 1, 2019, through September 31, 2020, DHS 
collected internal data similar to that of Form I-129. The total number 
of Form I-140 petitions was 129,531, with 25,279 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 SEA 
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 25,279 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 25,279 unique entities that filed Form I-140 
petitions.
    Of the 550 searches for small entities that filed Form I-140 
petitions, 464 searches successfully matched the name of the filing 
entity to names in the databases and 86 searches did not match 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 non-matched entities as 
small entities for the purpose of this analysis. Among the 464 matches 
for Form I-140, DHS determined 292 to be small entities based on 
revenue or employee count and according to their NAICS code. Therefore, 
DHS was able to classify 379 of 550 entities as small entities that 
filed Form I-140 petitions, including combined non-matches (86), 
matches missing data (1), and small entity matches (292). Using the 
online databases mentioned above (Data Axle, Manta, Cortera, and 
Guidestar), one matched entity found in the databases lacked applicable 
revenue statistics.
    DHS determined that 379 out of 550 (68.9 percent) entities filing 
Form I-140 petitions were small entities. Furthermore, DHS determined 
that 292 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 292 were a small entity subset of the random sample 
of 550 entity searches, they were considered statistically significant 
in the context of this research based on sales revenue information. 
Similar to Form I-129, DHS calculated the economic impact of this rule 
on entities that filed Form I-140 by estimating the total costs 
associated with the proposed fee increase for each entity and divided 
that amount by the sales revenue of that entity.\346\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \346\ Total Impact to Entity = (Number of Petitions Submitted 
per Entity * $615 Fee amount Increase)/Entity Sales Revenue. USCIS 
used the lower end of the sales revenue range for those entities 
where ranges were provided.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Among the 292 small entities with reported revenue data, 98 percent 
experienced an economic impact of less than 1 percent, with the 
exception of 2 percent of the small entities. Using the above 
methodology, the greatest economic impact proposed by this fee change 
was 2.71 percent and the smallest was 0.006 percent per entity. Because 
of the fee increase, these small entities would see a cost increase per 
application in filing fees based on petitions. The average impact on 
all 292 small entities with revenue data was 0.16 percent.
Small Entity Classification
    With an aggregated total of 379 out of a sample size of 550, DHS 
inferred that

[[Page 553]]

a majority, or 68.9 percent, of the entities filing Form I-140 
petitions were small entities. Small entities filing petitions could be 
for-profit businesses or not-for-profit entities. To understand the 
extent to which not-for-profits were included in the samples selected 
for each form DHS categorized entities as for-profit or not-for-profit. 
The business data provider databases do not distinguish if entities are 
for-profit or not-for-profit, so DHS used the assumption that entities 
with NAICS codes 712 (Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar 
Institutions), 813 (Religious, Grantmaking, Civic, Professional, and 
Similar Organizations), and 6241 (Family Social Services) were not-for-
profit. The NAICS code 611 (Educational Services) may have for-profit 
entities. Similar to the Form I-129 small entity types, the sample of 
Form I-140 consisted mainly of small businesses, with no small 
governmental jurisdictions in the sample and 15 small not-for-profits.
Cumulative Impact of Form I-129 and Form I-140 Petitions
    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. 
Based on the samples in the individual analyses, USCIS isolated those 
entities that overlapped in both samples of Forms I-129 and I-140 by 
EIN and revenue. Only 1 entity had an EIN that overlapped in both 
samples; this was a large 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 2 forms to be an economically significant burden on a number of 
small entities.
3. Civil Surgeon Designation, Form I-910
    DHS proposes to increase the fee for Civil Surgeon Designations, 
Form I-910, from $785 to $1,230, an increase of $445 (57 percent). To 
calculate the economic impact of this increase, USCIS estimated the 
total costs associated with the fee increase for each entity and 
divided that amount by the sales revenue of that entity.\347\ Using a 
12-month period of data from October 1, 2019, to September 31, 
2020,\348\ DHS collected internal data on filings of Form I-910. The 
total number of Form I-910 applications was 639, with 428 unique 
entities that filed applications. The third-party databases mentioned 
previously were used again to search for revenue and employee count 
information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \347\ Total Impact to Entity = (Number of Petitions Submitted 
per Entity * $445 Fee Amount Increase) Entity Sales Revenue. USCIS 
used the lower end of the sales revenue range for those entities 
where ranges were provided.
    \348\ DHS acknowledges the broad effects of the COVID-19 
international pandemic on the United States and the populations 
affected by this rule. However, while most forms were impacted as a 
result of COVID, Form I-129 receipts increased in line with recent 
years. Thus, we decided to use the most recent fiscal year data from 
FY 20 for the samples to complete the supplemental Small Entity 
Analysis to maintain consistency across IRFAs regardless of the 
general effect of COVID-19 on filings, because that effect is not 
applicable to the forms discussed in this section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Using the same methodology as for the Forms I-129 and I-140, USCIS 
conducted the SEA 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 203 entities, 
which included using a 95 percent confidence level and a 5 percent 
confidence interval on a population of 428 unique entities for Form I-
910. USCIS conducted searches on 300 randomly selected entities from a 
population of 428 unique entities for Form I-910 petitions, a sample 
size approximately 48-percent larger than the minimum necessary.
    Of the 300 searches for small entities that filed Form I-910 
petitions, 244 searches successfully matched the name of the filing 
entity to names in the databases and 56 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 considers all of 
the non-matched entities as small entities for the purpose of this 
analysis. Among the 244 matches for Form I-910, DHS determined 207 to 
be small entities based on their revenue or employee count and 
according to their NAICS code. Therefore, DHS was able to classify 268 
of 300 entities as small entities that filed Form I-910 petitions, 
including combined non-matches (5), matches missing data (56), and 
small entity matches (207). DHS also used the online databases 
mentioned above (Data Axle, Manta, Cortera, and Guidestar), and the 
five matches missing data that were found in the databases lacked 
revenue data and associated employment threshold.
    DHS determined that 268 out of 300 (89.3 percent) entities filing 
Form I-910 applications were small entities. Furthermore, DHS 
determined that 207 of the 300 entities searched were small entities 
based on sales revenue data, which were needed to estimate the economic 
impact of the proposed rule. Since these 207 were a small entity subset 
of the random sample of 300 entity searches, they were considered 
statistically significant in the context of this research, based on 
sales revenue information.
    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 the 
total impact associated with the proposed fee increase for each entity 
and divided that amount by the sales revenue of that entity. Among the 
207 small entities with reported revenue data, 97.6 percent experienced 
an economic impact considerably less than 1 percent, with the exception 
of 2.4 percent of the small entities. The greatest economic impact 
imposed by this proposed fee change was 1.85 percent and the smallest 
was 0.004 percent per entity. The average impact on all 207 small 
entities with revenue data was 0.15 percent. The increased fee will 
increase individual applicants' cost by $445.
Small Entity Classification
    With an aggregated total of 268 out of a sample size of 300, DHS 
inferred that a majority, or 89.3 percent, of the entities filing Form 
I-910 petitions were small entities. Small entities filing petitions 
could be for-profit businesses or not-for-profit entities. To 
understand the extent to which not-for-profits were included in the 
samples selected for each form DHS categorized entities as for-profit 
or not-for-profit. The business data provider databases do not 
distinguish if entities are for-profit or not-for-profit, so DHS used 
the assumption that entities with NAICS codes 712 (Museums, Historical 
Sites, and Similar Institutions), 813 (Religious, Grantmaking, Civic, 
Professional, and Similar Organizations), and 6241 (Family Social 
Services) were not-for-profit. The NAICS code 611 (Educational 
Services) may have for-profit entities. The sample of Form I-910 
consisted mainly of small businesses, with no small governmental 
jurisdictions in the sample and 5 small not-for-profits.
4. Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant, Form I-360
    DHS proposes to increase the fee for entities petitioning on behalf 
of foreign religious workers who file using Form I-360 from $435 to 
$515, an increase of $80 (18 percent), including entities who petition 
on behalf of foreign religious workers. To calculate the impact of the 
increase, DHS estimated the total costs

[[Page 554]]

associated with the fee increase for each entity and divided that 
amount by the sales revenue of that entity.\349\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \349\ Total Impact to Entity = (Number of Petitions Submitted 
per Entity * $80 Fee Amount Increase)/Entity Sales Revenue. USCIS 
used the lower end of the sales revenue range for those entities 
where ranges were provided.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Using a 12-month period of data on the number of Form I-360 
petitions filed from October 1, 2019, to September 31, 2020, DHS 
collected internal data on filings of Form I-360 for religious workers. 
The total number of Form I-360 petitions was 2,388, with 489 unique 
entities that filed petitions. DHS used the same databases mentioned 
previously to search for information on revenue and employee count.
    DHS used the same method as with Forms I-129 and I-140 to conduct 
the SEA 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 215 entities, which 
included using a 95 percent confidence level and a 5 percent confidence 
interval on a population of 489 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 95 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 489 unique entities that filed Form I-360 
petitions.
    Of the 420 searches for small entities that filed Form I-360 
petitions, 248 searches successfully matched the name of the filing 
entity to names in the databases and 172 searches did not match the 
name of a filing entity in the databases. DHS assumes that filing 
entities not found in the online databases are likely to be small 
entities. As a result, to prevent underestimating the number of small 
entities this rule would affect, DHS conservatively considers all of 
the non-matched entities as small entities for the purpose of this 
analysis. Among the 248 matches for Form I-360, DHS determined 208 to 
be small entities based on revenue or employee count and according to 
their NAICS code. Therefore, DHS was able to classify 399 of 420 
entities as small entities that filed Form I-360 petitions, including 
combined non-matches (172), matches missing data (19), and small entity 
matches (208). DHS also used the online databases mentioned above (Data 
Axle, Manta, Cortera, and Guidestar), and the 19 matches missing data 
that were found in the databases lacked revenue or employee count data.
    DHS determined that 399 out of 420 (95.0 percent) entities filing 
Form I-360 petitions were small entities. Furthermore, DHS determined 
that 208 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 these 208 small entities were a subset of the random sample 
of 420 entity searches, they were considered statistically significant 
in the context of this research.
    Similar to other forms analyzed in this IRFA, DHS calculated the 
economic impact of this rule on entities that filed Form I-360 on 
behalf of religious workers by estimating the total costs associated 
with the proposed fee increase for each entity. Among the 208 small 
entities with reported revenue data, 99.5 percent experienced an 
economic impact of less than 1 percent, with the exception of 0.5 
percent of the small entities. The greatest economic impact imposed by 
this proposed fee change was 4.11 percent and the smallest was 0.0008 
percent per entity. The average impact on all 208 small entities with 
revenue data was 0.08 percent.
    DHS also analyzed the proposed costs of this rule on the 
petitioning entities relative to the costs of the typical employee's 
salary. Guidelines suggested by the SBA's 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.\350\ According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the 
mean annual salary is $57,230 for clergy,\351\ $52,880 for directors of 
religious activities and education,\352\ and $43,290 for other 
religious workers.\353\ Based on an average of 1.59 religious workers 
\354\ petitioned for per entity, the additional average annual cost 
would be $127.20 per entity.\355\ The additional costs per entity 
proposed by this rule represent only 0.22 percent of the average annual 
salary for clergy, 0.24 percent of the average annual salary for 
directors of religious activities and education, and 0.29 percent of 
the average annual salary for all other religious workers.\356\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \350\ Office of Advocacy, Small Business Administration ``A 
Guide for Government Agencies, How to Comply with the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act,'' page 19: Available at https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/advocacy/How-to-Comply-with-the-RFA-WEB.pdf.
    \351\ BLS, ``Occupational Employment Statistics, May 2021, 
``Clergy'': https://www.bls.gov/oes/2021/may/oes212011.htm.
    \352\ BLS, ``Occupational Employment Statistics, May 2021, 
``Directors of Religious Activities and Education'': Available at 
https://www.bls.gov/oes/2021/may/oes212021.htm.
    \353\ BLS, ``Occupational Employment Statistics, May 2021, 
``Religious Workers, All Other'': Available at https://www.bls.gov/oes/2021/may/oes212099.htm.
    \354\ USCIS calculated the average filing per entity of 1.6 
petitions, from the Form I-360 Sample with Petition Totals in 
Appendix E of the SEA for this NPRM. Calculation: (total number of 
petitions from each sample id)/(total number of sample Form I-360 
petitions) = 667/420 = 1.59 average petitions filed per entity.
    \355\ Calculation: 1.59 average petitions per entity * $80 
increase in petition fees = $127.20 additional total cost per 
entity.
    \356\ Calculation: $127.20 additional cost per entity/$57,230 
clergy salary x 100 = 0.22 percent; $127.20 additional cost per 
entity/$52,880 directors of religious activities and education x 100 
= 0.24 percent; $127.20 additional cost per entity/$43,290 other 
religious workers x 100 = 0.29 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Small Entity Classification
    With an aggregated total of 399 out of a sample size of 420, DHS 
inferred that a large majority, or 95.0 percent, of the entities filing 
Form I-360 petitions were small entities. Small entities filing 
petitions could be for-profit businesses or not-for-profit entities. To 
understand the extent to which not-for-profits were included in the 
samples selected for each form DHS categorized entities as for-profit 
or not-for-profit. The business data provider databases do not 
distinguish if entities are for-profit or not-for-profit, so DHS used 
the assumption that entities with NAICS codes 712 (Museums, Historical 
Sites, and Similar Institutions), 813 (Religious, Grantmaking, Civic, 
Professional, and Similar Organizations), and 6241 (Family Social 
Services) were not-for-profit. The NAICS code 611 (Educational 
Services) may have for-profit entities. The sample of Form I-360 
consists of a majority not-for-profit entities, primarily composed of 
religious institutions. There were no small governmental jurisdictions 
in the sample and 221 small not-for-profits.
5. Genealogy Requests--Genealogy Index Search Request, Form G-1041, and 
Genealogy Records Request, Form G-1041A
    In this proposed rule, DHS establishes an increase in the fee for 
the Genealogy Index Search Request, Form G-1041, from $65 to $120, an 
increase of $55 (85 percent) for those who mail in this request on 
paper. This proposed rule increases the fee for requestors who use the 
online electronic Form G-1041 version from the current $65 to $100, an 
increase of $35 (54 percent).
    In this proposed rule, DHS establishes a fee for Form G-1041A that 
would increase from $65 to $260, an increase of $195 (300 percent) for 
those who mail

[[Page 555]]

in this request on paper. In this proposed rule, the fee for requestors 
who use the online electronic Form G-1041A will increase from the 
current $65 to $240, an increase of $175 (269 percent).
    Finally, DHS is proposing to charge a fee for requests for a 
Certificate of Non-Existence. Currently, USCIS allows individuals to 
request a Certificate of Non-Existence to document that USCIS has no 
records indicating that an individual became a naturalized citizen of 
the United States. This service is often used by individuals gathering 
genealogical records to claim the citizenship of another nation. USCIS 
operates the Certificate of Non-Existence request process informally 
and at no cost to individuals while absorbing the costs to provide this 
service.\357\ DHS proposes a fee of $315 for individuals to recover the 
estimated full cost of processing these requests, which will require 
submission of Form G-1566, Request for a Certificate of Non-Existence, 
once approved by OMB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \357\ See 8 CFR 103.7(f) as of October 1, 2020, which provides 
that 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The population affected by this provision includes individuals who 
use Form G-1041 to request a search of USCIS historical indices and 
individuals who use Form G-1041A to obtain copies of USCIS historical 
records found through an index request. The affected population also 
includes individuals who request a Certificate of Non-Existence to 
document that USCIS has no records indicating that an individual became 
a naturalized citizen of the United States. Based on the DHS records, 
Table 33 shows the estimated number of genealogy index search requests 
and historical records requests that were submitted to USCIS using 
Forms G-1041 and G-1041A for FY 2016 through FY 2020. DHS estimates 
that an annual average of 5,250 Form G-1041 index search requests and 
3,352 Form G-1041A records requests were received during that time. For 
both forms, more than 90 percent of the requests were submitted 
electronically.
BILLING CODE 9111-97-P

[[Page 556]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.099

BILLING CODE 9111-97-C
    Table 33 depicts the FY 2016 through FY 2020 filing receipts of the 
certificate of non-existence. DHS bases the estimate for the Form G-
1566 on these receipts and estimates that the average annual receipts 
for Form G-1566 would be approximately 1,266.
    DHS has previously determined that requests for historical records 
are usually made by individuals.\358\ 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 who 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. DHS 
assumes genealogists have access to a computer and the internet. DHS is 
unable to estimate the online number of index searches and records 
requests; however, some will receive a reduced fee and cost savings, by 
filing online. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \358\ See Establishment of a Genealogy Program, 73 FR 28026 (May 
15, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For this proposed rule, DHS is expanding the use of electronic 
genealogy requests to encourage requestors to use the electronic 
versions of Form G-1041 and Form G-1041A. DHS is also changing the 
search request process so that USCIS may provide requestors with 
electronic records, if they exist, in response to the initial index 
request. These changes may reduce the time it takes to request and 
receive genealogy records, and, in some cases, it will 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

[[Page 557]]

will be filed since there would already be a copy of the record if it 
was previously digitized. DHS proposes to provide the requestor with 
those preexisting digital records, if they exist, via email in response 
to the initial search request. 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. DHS recognizes that some small 
entities may be impacted by these proposed increased fees but cannot 
determine how many or the exact impact. DHS requests comments from the 
public on the impacts to small entities of the proposed fee increases 
to the genealogy forms.
6. Application for Regional Center Designation Under the EB-5 Regional 
Center Pilot Program, Form I- 956 (Formerly Form I-924) and I-956G 
(Formerly Form I-924A)
    Congress created the EB-5 program in 1990 to stimulate the U.S. 
economy through job creation and capital investment by immigrant 
investors. The EB-5 regional center program was later added in 1992 by 
the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and 
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1993. Public Law 102-395, sec. 
610, 106 Stat 1828 (Oct. 6, 1992). As amended, the EB-5 program makes 
approximately 10,000 visas available annually to foreign nationals (and 
their dependents) who invest at least $1,050,00 or a discounted amount 
of $800,000 if the investment is in a targeted employment area (TEA) 
(which includes certain rural areas and areas of high unemployment) or 
infrastructure project in a U.S. business that will create at least 10 
full-time jobs in the United States for qualifying employees. See INA 
sec. 203(b)(5), 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(5); 8 U.S.C. 11538 U.S.C. 1153. Such 
investment amounts are not necessarily indicative of whether the 
regional center is appropriately characterized as a small entity for 
purposes of the RFA. Due to the lack of regional center revenue data, 
DHS assumes regional centers collect revenue primarily through the 
administrative fees charged to investors.
    On March 5, 2022, the President signed the EB-5 Reform and 
Integrity Act of 2022, Div. BB of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 
2022 (Pub. L. 117-103). The EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022 
immediately repealed the Regional Center (RC) Pilot Program created by 
the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and 
Related Agencies Appropriations Act 1993, Public Law 102-395, 106 Stat. 
1828, sec. 610(b). The law also authorizes a new EB-5 Regional Center 
Program, which will become effective May 14, 2022 and is authorized 
through FY 2026 and makes various changes to the program. As discussed 
more fully in section VIII.N. of the NPRM, DHS proposes new fees for 
the forms used in the EB-5 program in this proposed rule.
    DHS proposes changes to various fees for regional centers and 
related immigration benefit requests related to Employment-Based 
Immigrant Visa, Fifth Preference (EB-5). The EB-5 Reform and Integrity 
Act of 2022 immediately repealed and replaced the prior EB-5 ``regional 
center program.'' The EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022 has no 
immediate impact on the staffing levels of the USCIS Immigrant Investor 
Program Office, although each existing Regional Center will be required 
to submit a request to be re-approved under the law, which could 
greatly increase the program workload initially. Nevertheless, and 
despite the changes in the law and program, DHS has proposed fees in 
this rule based on the currently projected staffing needs to meet the 
adjudicative and administrative burden of the Immigrant Investor 
Program Office pending the fee study required by section 106(a) of the 
EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022. Thus, the annual filing volume 
projections in this rule are based on historical volumes and trends 
because the EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022 is too new for DHS to 
accurately estimate its impacts on filing volumes. DHS welcomes 
comments from the public on the number of forms for the EB-5 program 
that will be submitted annually and how that number will be changed by 
the recent legislation. DHS may adjust the estimated filing volumes in 
the final rule based on additional analysis and comments on this rule.
    DHS is proposing a fee for Form I-956, Application for Regional 
Center Designation, is $47,695, a $29,900 (168 percent) increase from 
the $17,795 fee for Form I-924, Application for Regional Center 
Designation under the Immigrant Investor Program. See 8 CFR 
103.7(b)(1)(i)(WW) (Oct. 1, 2020); proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(64). DHS 
also proposes a $47,695 fee for Form I-956F, Application for Approval 
of Investment in a Commercial Enterprise, because its adjudicative 
burden is nearly identical to that of the Form I-956. The proposed fee 
for Form I-956G, Regional Center Annual Statement, is $4,470, a $1,435 
(47 percent) increase from the current $3,035 fee Form I-924A, Annual 
Certification of Regional Center. See 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1)(i)(WW) (Oct. 1, 
2020); proposed 8 CFR 106.2(a)(66). The EB-5 program encompasses Forms 
I-526, I-829, I-956, I-965F, and I-956G.\359\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \359\ The Supplement to Form I-956G is used to certify a 
Regional Center's continued eligibility for the Regional Center 
designation through an annual certification. Each designated 
Regional Center entity must file a Form I-956G for each fiscal year 
within 90 days after the end of the fiscal year of the calendar year 
in which the fiscal year ended. DHS has also created Forms I-956H, 
Bona Fides of Persons Involved with Regional Center Program, and I-
956K Registration for Direct and Third-Party Promoters, for the new 
EB-5 program. DHS proposes no fee for those forms in this proposed 
rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS is creating these new forms as stated above, as part of the EB-
5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022. Since Form I-956/I-956A will be new 
forms and historical data does not exist. Because the immigration 
benefit adjudications previously performed using Form I-924 will now be 
administered using Forms I-956 and I-956G, DHS will use historical data 
of the previous Form I-956 (formerly Form I-924) Application for 
Regional Center Designation and Form I-956G (formerly Form I-924A), 
Annual Certification of Regional Center as a proxy for the analysis. 
Under the Regional Center Program, foreign nationals based their EB-5 
petitions on investments in new commercial enterprises located within 
``regional centers.'' DHS regulations define a regional center as an 
economic unit, public or private, that promotes economic growth, 
regional productivity, job creation, and increased domestic capital 
investment. See 8 CFR 204.6(e). Requests for regional center 
designation must be filed with USCIS on Form I-956 (formerly Form I-
924), Application for Regional Center Designation Under the Immigrant 
Investor Program. See 8 CFR 204.6(m)(3) and (4). Once designated, 
regional centers must provide USCIS with updated information to 
demonstrate continued eligibility for the designation by submitting 
Form I-956G (formerly Form I-924A), Annual Certification of Regional 
Center on an annual basis or as otherwise requested. See 8 CFR 
204.6(m)(6)(i)(B).
    The application process would require the same information from 
applicants that is currently required. As shown in Table 34, during the 
5-year period from FY 2016 through FY 2020, USCIS received a total of 
951 annual Form I-956 (formerly Form I-924) regional centers 
applications and 4,091

[[Page 558]]

Form I-956G (formerly Form I-924A) annual statements, with annual 
averages 190 and 818 respectively.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.100

    Regional centers are difficult to assess because there is a lack of 
official USCIS data on employment, income, and industry classification 
for these entities. It is difficult to determine the small entity 
status of regional centers without such data. Such a determination is 
also difficult because regional centers can be structured in a variety 
of different ways, and can involve multiple business and financial 
activities, some of which may play a direct or indirect role in linking 
investor funds to NCEs and job-creating projects or entities. Regional 
centers also pose a challenge for analysis as their structure is often 
complex and can involve many related business and financial activities 
not directly involved with EB-5 activities. Regional centers can be 
made up of several layers of business and financial activities that 
focus on matching foreign investor funds to development projects to 
capture above-market return differentials.
    While DHS attempted to treat regional centers similar to the other 
entities in this analysis, DHS was not able to identify most of the 
entities in any of the public or private online databases. Furthermore, 
while regional centers are an integral component of the EB-5 program, 
DHS does not collect data on the administrative fees the regional 
centers charge to the foreign investors who are investing in one of 
their projects. DHS did not focus on the bundled capital investment 
amounts (either a discounted $500,000 if the investment is in a TEA 
project, which includes certain rural areas and areas of high 
unemployment, or $1 million for a non-TEA project per investor, in a 
U.S. business that will create or preserve at least 10 full-time jobs 
in the United States for qualifying employees) \360\ that get invested 
into an NCE. Such investment amounts are not necessarily indicative of 
whether the regional center is appropriately characterized as a small 
entity for purposes of the RFA. Due to the lack of regional center 
revenue data, DHS assumes regional centers collect revenue primarily 
through the administrative fees charged to investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \360\ U.S. Department of Homeland Security, USCIS--EB-5 
Immigrant Investor Program Modernization, Proposed rule. See 84 FR 
35750 (July 24, 2019). Available at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-07-24/pdf/2019-15000.pdf. This amount by investor is 
determined between a designated Target Employment Area and non-
Target Employment Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS did consider the information provided by regional center 
applicants as part of the Forms I-956 (formerly Form I-924) and I-956G 
(formerly Form I-924A); however, it 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. In the DHS proposed rule ``EB-5 Immigrant Investor 
Program Modernization,'' DHS analyzed estimated administrative fees and 
revenue amounts for regional centers.\361\ DHS found both the mean and 
median for administrative fees to be $50,000 and the median revenue 
amount to be

[[Page 559]]

$1,250,000 over the period FY 2017 through FY 2020. 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 proposed rule can 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.\362\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \361\ Id.
    \362\ Calculation: 1 percent of $447,000 = $4,470 (the new fee 
for Form I-956G; formerly Form I-924A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DHS welcomes comments from the public on the impacts to small 
entities of the proposed fee increases to Form I-956G (formerly 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.
    d. 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 Form I-
129, I-140, I-910, I-360, G-1041, G-1041A, I-956 (formerly Form I-924), 
or I-956G (formerly I-924A). The proposed rule does not require any new 
professional skills for reporting.
    e. 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.
    f. 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 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;
    (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 are paid by individuals, 
as described above, some also are paid by small entities. USCIS seeks 
to minimize the impact on all parties, and 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 proposed rule, 
significant operational changes would be necessary in order for USCIS 
to provide current immigration and naturalization benefits to the 
public. These changes would include reductions in 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 could result in longer 
application processing times, a degradation in service to applicants 
and petitioners, and reduced efficiency over time. DHS is therefore not 
proposing to exempt small entities from the fee increases outlined in 
this proposed rule.
    g. Questions for Comment to Assist Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.
     DHS seeks comment on the numbers of small entities that 
may be impacted by this proposed rulemaking.
     DHS seeks comment on any or all of the provisions in the 
proposed rule with regard to the economic impact of this proposed 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.
     DHS seeks comment on any significant alternatives DHS 
should consider in lieu of the changes proposed by this proposed rule.
     DHS seeks 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 of 1995

    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 rule, or final rule 
for which the agency published a proposed rule, that includes any 
Federal mandate that may result in $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.\363\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \363\ See 2 U.S.C. 1532(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While this proposed rule is expected to exceed the $100 million in 
1995 expenditure in any one year when adjusted for inflation ($178 
million in 2021 dollars based on the Consumer Price Index for All Urban 
Consumers (CPI-U)),\364\ DHS does not believe this proposed rule would 
impose any unfunded Federal mandates on State, local, and Tribal 
governments, in the aggregate, or on the private sector. It does not 
contain a Federal mandate as

[[Page 560]]

the term is defined under UMRA.\365\ The requirements of Title II of 
UMRA, therefore, do not apply, and DHS has not prepared a written 
statement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \364\ See U.S. Department of Labor, BLS, ``Historical Consumer 
Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U): U.S. city average, all 
items, by month,'' available at https://www.bls.gov/cpi/tables/supplemental-files/historical-cpi-u-202112.pdf (last visited Jan. 
13, 2022). Calculation of inflation: (1) Calculate the average 
monthly CPI-U for the reference year (1995) and the current year 
(2021); (2) Subtract reference year CPI-U from current year CPI-U; 
(3) Divide the difference of the reference year CPI-U and current 
year CPI-U by the reference year CPI-U; (4) Multiply by 100 = 
[(Average monthly CPI-U for 2021-Average monthly CPI-U for 1995)/
(Average monthly CPI-U for 1995)]*100=[(270.970-152.383)/
152.383]*100=(118.587/152.383)*100=0.77821673*100=77.82 percent=78 
percent (rounded). Calculation of inflation-adjusted value: $100 
million in 1995 dollars*1.78=$178 million in 2021 dollars.
    \365\ The term ``Federal mandate'' means a Federal 
intergovernmental mandate or a Federal private sector mandate. See 2 
U.S.C. 1502(1), 658(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 
(Congressional Review Act)

    The Congressional Review Act (CRA) was included as part of the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA) by 
section 804 of SBREFA, Public Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 847, 868, et seq. 
This proposed rule, if finalized, would be a major rule as defined by 
section 804 of SBREFA because the aggregate amount of additional fees 
to be collected will exceed $100 million. See 5 U.S.C. 804(2)(A) 
(providing that a rule is a major rule if it is likely to result in an 
annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more). Accordingly, 
absent exceptional circumstances, this proposed 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 as required by 5 U.S.C. 
801(a)(1).

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 E.O. 13132, it is determined that this proposed rule does not have 
sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a 
federalism summary impact statement.

F. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This proposed rule was drafted and reviewed in accordance with E.O. 
12988, Civil Justice Reform. This proposed rule was written to provide 
a clear legal standard for affected conduct and was carefully reviewed 
to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguities to minimize litigation and 
undue burden on the Federal court system. DHS has determined that this 
proposed rule meets the applicable standards provided in section 3(a) 
and 3(b)(2) of E.O. 12988.

G. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments)

    This proposed rule would not have ``Tribal implications'' under 
E.O. 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, because it does not have substantial direct effects on one 
or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal 
Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. 
Accordingly, E.O. 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian 
Tribal Governments, requires no further agency action or analysis.

H. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the PRA 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. 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 
instruments. Please see the accompanying PRA documentation for the full 
analysis. The Information Collection table below shows the summary of 
forms that are part of this rulemaking.
BILLING CODE 9111-97-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.101


[[Page 561]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.102


[[Page 562]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.103


[[Page 563]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04JA23.104

BILLING CODE 9111-97-C
    USCIS is consolidating all information related to Form fees, fee 
exemptions, and how to submit fee payments into Form G-1055, Fee 
Schedule. Most fee-related language, including language from sections 
What is the Filing Fee, How To Check If the Fees Are Correct, Fee 
Waiver, and Premium Processing content is being removed from individual 
Form Instructions documents, which results in a per-response hour 
burden reduction for many USCIS information collections and an overall 
total hour burden reduction for the USCIS information collection 
inventory. In accordance with the PRA, the information collection 
notice is published in the Federal Register and will include the 
proposed edits to the information collection instruments.
    This rulemaking will also require non-substantive edits to some 
USCIS information collections, which are indicated in Table 35 as ``No 
material/non-substantive change to a currently approved collection'' in 
the Type of PRA Action column. The USCIS Form I-854A, Inter-Agency 
Alien Witness and Informant Record, edits include updating general 
instructions language. As stated previously in this preamble, DHS has 
recently created Forms I-526, Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur, 
and Form I-526E, Immigrant Petition by Regional Center Investor, Form 
I-956, Application for Regional Center Designation, Form I-956F, 
Application for Approval of Investment in a Commercial Enterprise, Form 
I-956G, Regional Center Annual Statement, Form I-956H, Bona Fides of 
Persons Involved with Regional Center Program, and Form I-956K 
Registration for Direct and Third-Party Promoters, to implement the EB-
5 Reform and Integrity Act of 2022. USCIS continues to use Form I-829, 
Petition by Investor to Remove Conditions on Permanent Resident Status, 
to adjudicate requests from investors under the previous statute and 
regulations, and as authorized by the EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 
2022. Those forms are not subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act. See 
Public Law 117-103, div. BB, sec. 106(d) (providing that for a 1-year 
period the requirements of the PRA do not apply to any collection of 
information required to implement the EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act of 
2022). Thus, those forms are not discussed in this section although new 
fees are proposed for them in this rule. If the applicable forms are 
approved by OMB before the final rule is published, the final rule will 
be updated accordingly.
USCIS Form G-1041; G1041A
    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

[[Page 564]]

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 1615-0096 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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: Genealogy Index Search Request; 
Genealogy Records Request (For each microfilm or hard copy file).
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: G-1041; G-1041A; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. The 
Genealogy Program is necessary to provide a more timely response to 
requests for genealogical and historical records. Form G-1041 is 
provided as a convenient means for persons to provide data necessary to 
perform a search of historical agency indices. Form G-1041A provides a 
convenient means for persons to identify a particular record desired 
under the Genealogy Program. The forms provide rapid identification of 
such requests and ensures expeditious handling. Persons such as 
researchers, historians, and social scientists seeking ancestry 
information for genealogical, family history and their location 
purposes will use Forms G-1041 and G-1041A.
    (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 G-1041 
is 3,847 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.317 hours; the 
estimated total number of respondents for Form G-1041A is 2,920 and the 
estimated hour burden per response is 0.317 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 2,146 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 $25,376.
USCIS Form G-1566
    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 1615-0156 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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: Request for a Certificate of Non-
Existence.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: G-1566; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. USCIS 
will use the information collected on Form G-1566 to determine whether 
any immigration records about the subject of record listed on the form 
exist. If no records about the subject of record exist, USCIS will 
provide a Certificate of Nonexistence. If USCIS finds records related 
to the subject of record, a Certificate of Non-Existence will not be 
issued, but the requestor will be notified that records were found.
    (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 G-1566 is 
2,000 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 1,000 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 $122,000.
USCIS Form I-102
    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 1615-0079 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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

[[Page 565]]

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, for example, 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 Replacement/
Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival/Departure Document.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-102; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. 
Nonimmigrants temporarily residing in the United States can use this 
form to request a replacement of a lost, stolen, or mutilated Form I-
94, Arrival/Departure Record, or to request a new Arrival/Departure 
Record, if one was not issued when the nonimmigrant was last admitted 
but the nonimmigrant is now in need of such a record. USCIS uses the 
information provided by the requester to verify eligibility, as well as 
his or her status, process the request, and issue a new or replacement 
Arrival/Departure Record. If the application is approved, USCIS will 
issue a Form I-94, Arrival/Departure Record.
    (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-102 
is 4,100 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.567 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 2,325 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 $1,182,440.
USCIS Form I-129
    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 1615-0009 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-129; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Business or other for-profit; Not-
for-profit institutions. USCIS uses the data collected on this form to 
determine the eligibility of a business to petition for a nonimmigrant 
worker to come to the United States temporarily to perform services or 
labor, or to receive training, as an 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 worker. 
Petitioners may also use this form to request an extension of stay in 
or change of status to E-1, E-2, E-3, H-1B1 or TN, or one of the above 
classifications for an alien.
    (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-129 
is 572,606 and the estimated hour burden per response is 2.157 hours; 
the estimated total number of respondents for the information 
collection E-1/E-2 Classification Supplement is 12,050 and the 
estimated hour burden per response is 0.67; the estimated total number 
of respondents for the information collection Trade Agreement 
Supplement to Form I-129 is 12,945 and the estimated hour burden per 
response is 0.67; the estimated total number of respondents for the 
information collection H Classification Supplement to Form I-129 is 
471,983 and the estimated hour burden per response is 2; the estimated 
total number of respondents for the information collection H-1B and H-
1B1 Data Collection and Filing Fee Exemption Supplement is 398,936 and 
the estimated hour burden per response is 1; the estimated total number 
of respondents for the information collection L Classification 
Supplement to Form I-129 is 40,358 and the estimated hour burden per 
response is 1.34; the estimated total number of respondents for the 
information collections O and P Classifications Supplement to Form I-
129 is 28,434 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1; the 
estimated total number of respondents for the information collection Q-
1 Classification Supplement to Form I-129 is 54 and the estimated hour 
burden per response is 0.34; the estimated total number of respondents 
for the information collection R-1 Classification Supplement to Form I-
129 is 6,782 and the estimated hour burden per response is 2.34.
    (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 2,693,162 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 $294,892,090.
USCIS Form I-129CW; I-129CWR
    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 1615-0079 in the body of the letter and 
the agency

[[Page 566]]

name. 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, for example, 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 CNMI-Only 
Nonimmigrant Transitional Worker; Semiannual Report for CW-1 Workers.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-129CW; I-129CWR; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Business and other for-profit. USCIS 
uses the data collected on Form I-129CW to determine eligibility for 
the requested immigration benefits. An employer uses Form I-129CW to 
petition USCIS for a noncitizen to temporarily enter as a nonimmigrant 
into the CNMI to perform services or labor as a CW-1 worker. An 
employer also uses Form I-129CW to request an extension of stay or 
change of status on behalf of the noncitizen worker. Form I-129CW 
serves the purpose of standardizing requests for these benefits and 
ensuring that the basic information required to determine eligibility 
is provided by the petitioners.
    Form I-129CWR, Semiannual Report for CW-1 Employers, is used by 
employers to comply with the reporting requirements imposed by the 
Workforce Act. Form I-129CWR captures data USCIS requires to help 
verify the continuing employment and payment of the CW-1 worker. DHS 
may provide such semiannual reports to other Federal partners, 
including the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) for investigative or other 
use as DOL may deem appropriate. Congress expressly provided for these 
semiannual reports to be shared with DOL. 48 U.S.C. 1806(d)(3)(D)(ii).
    (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-129CW 
is 5,975 and the estimated hour burden per response is 3.317 hours; the 
estimated total number of respondents for the information collection 
Form I-129CWR is 5,975 and the estimated hour burden per response is 
2.5 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 34,757 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 $3,809,063.
USCIS Form I-129F
    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 1615-0001 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 Alien 
Fianc[eacute](e).
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-129F; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and Households. Form I-
129F must be filed with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
(USCIS) by a citizen of the United States in order to petition for an 
alien spouse, fianc[eacute](e), or child.
    (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-129F 
is 47,700 and the estimated hour burden per response is 3.067 hours; 
the estimated total number of respondents for biometrics processing is 
47,700 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 202,105 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 $5,412,004.
USCIS Form I-129S
    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 1615-0010 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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;

[[Page 567]]

    (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, for example, 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: Nonimmigrant Petition Based on 
Blanket L Petition.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-129S; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Business or other for-profit. 
Employers seeking to classify employees outside the United States as 
executives, managers, or specialized knowledge professionals, as 
nonimmigrant intra-company transferees pursuant to a previously 
approved blanket petition under sections 214(c)(2) and 101(a)(15)(L) of 
the Act, may file this form. USCIS uses the information provided 
through this form to assess whether the employee meets the requirements 
for L-1 classification under blanket L petition approval. Submitting 
this information to USCIS is voluntary. USCIS may provide the 
information provided through this form to other Federal, State, local, 
and foreign government agencies and authorized organizations, and may 
also be made available, as appropriate, for law enforcement purposes or 
in the interest of national security.
    (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-129S 
is 75,000 and the estimated hour burden per response is 2.817 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 211,275 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 $36,750,000.
USCIS Form I-130; I-130A
    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 1615-0012 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 Alien Relative; 
Supplemental Information for Spouse Beneficiary.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-130; I-130A; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. Form I-
130 allows U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents of the United 
States to petition on behalf of certain alien relatives who wish to 
immigrate to the United States. Form I-130A allows for the collection 
of additional information for spouses of the petitioners necessary to 
facilitate a decision.
    (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-130 
paper filing is 437,500 and the estimated hour burden per response is 
1.817 hours; the estimated total number of respondents for the 
information collection Form I-130A is 40,775 and the estimated hour 
burden per response is 0.833 hours; and the estimated total number of 
respondents for the information collection Form I-130 online filing is 
437,500 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.5 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 1,485,154 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 $350,000,000.
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 the OMB Control Number 1615-0013 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, permitting 
electronic submission of responses.
    Overview of information collection:

[[Page 568]]

    (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 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 
noncitizens, principally permanent or conditional residents, refugees 
or asylees, applicants for adjustment of status, noncitizens in TPS, 
DACA recipients, and noncitizens abroad seeking humanitarian parole who 
need to apply for a travel document to lawfully enter or re-enter the 
United States. 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 
483,920 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.717 hours; the 
estimated total number of respondents for biometrics processing is 
84,000 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.17 hours, the 
estimated total number of respondents for passport-style photos is 
380,000 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 1,119,171 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 $146,072,480.
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. 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, for example, 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 Carrier 
Documentation.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of 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 0.837 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 10,236 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.
USCIS Form I-140
    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 1615-0015 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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: Immigrant Petition for Alien 
Workers.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-140; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Business or other for-profit; Not-
for-profit institutions. The information collected on this form will be 
used by USCIS to determine eligibility for the requested immigration 
benefits under section 203(b)(1), 203(b)(2), or 203(b)(3) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act.
    (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-140 
is 143,000 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.897 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 128,223 hours.

[[Page 569]]

    (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 $62,598,250.
USCIS Form I-191
    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 1615-0016 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 Relief Under 
Former Section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-191; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. USCIS and 
EOIR use the information on the form to properly assess and determine 
whether the applicant is eligible for a waiver under former section 
212(c) of INA.
    (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-191 
is 116 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.567 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 182 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 $59,740.
USCIS Form I-192
    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 1615-0017 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 Advance 
Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant (Pursuant to Section 
212(d)(3)(A)(ii) of the INA).
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-192; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. The data 
collected will be used by CBP and USCIS to determine whether the 
applicant is eligible to enter the United States temporarily under the 
provisions of section 212(d)(3), 212(d)(13), and 212(d)(14) of the INA. 
The respondents for this information collection are certain 
inadmissible nonimmigrant aliens who wish to apply for permission to 
enter the United States and applicants for T nonimmigrant status or 
petitioners for U nonimmigrant status. CBP has developed an electronic 
filing system, called Electronic Secured Adjudication Forms Environment 
(e-SAFE), through which Form I-192 can be submitted when filed with 
CBP.
    (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-192 
is 61,050 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.317 hours; 
the estimated total number of respondents for the information 
collection e-SAFE is 7,000 and the estimated hour burden per response 
is 1.25 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 89,153 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 $17,522,875.
USCIS Form I-212
    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 1615-0018 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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

[[Page 570]]

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, for example, 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 Permission to 
Reapply for Admission into the United States After Deportation or 
Removal.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-212; 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 Form I-212 to determine whether an alien is 
eligible for and should be granted the benefit of consent to reapply 
for admission into the United States. This form standardizes requests 
for consent to reapply and its data collection requirements ensure 
that, when filing the application, the alien provides the basic 
information that is required to assess eligibility for consent to 
reapply.
    (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-212 
paper filing is 7,000 and the estimated hour burden per response is 
1.817 hours. The estimated total number of respondents for the 
information collection I-212 (online filing via CBP e-SAFE) is 1,200 
and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.817 hours. The 
estimated total number of respondents for the information collection 
biometric submission is 350 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 15,309 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 $370,650.
USCIS Form I-290B
    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 1615-0095 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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: Notice of Appeal or Motion.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-290B; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. Form I-
290B standardizes requests for appeals and motions and ensures that the 
basic information required to adjudicate appeals and motions is 
provided by applicants and petitioners, or their attorneys or 
representatives. USCIS uses the data collected on Form I-290B to 
determine whether an applicant or petitioner is eligible to file an 
appeal or motion, whether the requirements of an appeal or motion have 
been met, and whether the applicant or petitioner is eligible for the 
requested immigration benefit. Form I-290B can also be filed with ICE 
by schools appealing decisions on Form I-17 filings for certification 
to ICE's Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP).
    (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-290B 
is 28,000 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.317 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 36,876 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 $8,652,000.
USCIS Form I-360
    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 1615-0020 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, permitting 
electronic submission of responses.
    Overview of information collection:
    (1) Type of Information Collection: Revision of a Currently 
Approved Collection.

[[Page 571]]

    (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Petition for Amerasian, 
Widow(er), or Special Immigrant.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-360; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. The Form 
I-360 may be used by an Amerasian; a widow or widower; a battered or 
abused spouse or child of a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident; 
a battered or abused parent of a U.S. citizen son or daughter; or a 
special immigrant (religious worker, Panama Canal company employee, 
Canal Zone government employee, U.S. Government employee in the Canal 
Zone; physician, international organization employee or family member, 
juvenile court dependent; armed forces member; Afghanistan or Iraq 
national who supported the U.S. Armed Forces as a translator; Iraq 
national who worked for the or on behalf of the U.S. Government in 
Iraq; or Afghan national who worked for or on behalf of the U.S. 
Government or the International Security Assistance Force [ISAF] in 
Afghanistan) who intend to establish their eligibility to immigrate to 
the United States. The data collected on this form is reviewed by U.S. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to determine if the 
petitioner may be qualified to obtain the benefit. The data collected 
on this form will also be used to issue an employment authorization 
document upon approval of the petition for battered or abused spouses, 
children, and parents, if requested.
    (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 Petition for 
Amerasian, Widower, or Special Immigration (Form I-360): Iraqi & Afghan 
Petitioners is 1,916 and the estimated hour burden per response is 
2.917 hours; the estimated total number of respondents for the 
information collection Petition for Amerasian, Widower, or Special 
Immigration (Form I-360): Religious Workers is 2,393 and the estimated 
hour burden per response is 2.167 hours; the estimated total number of 
respondents for the information collection Petition for Amerasian, 
Widower, or Special Immigration (Form I-360): All Others is 14,362 and 
the estimated hour burden per response is 1.917 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 38,307 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 $2,287,320.
USCIS Form I-485; I-485A; I-485J
    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 1615-0023 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 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).
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-485; I-485A; I-485J; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. Form I-
485 is used by all applicants seeking to adjust status to lawful 
permanent resident under INA section 245(a). Supplement A to Form I-485 
is used by a subset of applicants seeking to adjust status under INA 
section 245(i). Supplement J is used by applicants whose adjustment of 
status is based on an approved employment-based immigrant visa petition 
that requires a job offer.
    (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-485 
is 690,837 and the estimated hour burden per response is 7.087 hours; 
the estimated total number of respondents for the information 
collection Form I-485A is 29,213 and the estimated hour burden per 
response is 1.067 hours; the estimated total number of respondents for 
the information collection Form I-485J is 37,358 and the estimated hour 
burden per response is 0.917; the estimated total number of respondents 
for the information collection biometrics submission is 690,837 and the 
estimated hour burden per response is 1.17.
    (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 5,700,585 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 $1,093,101,980.
USCIS Form I-539; I-539A
    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 1615-0003 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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

[[Page 572]]

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, for example, 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 to Extend/Change 
Nonimmigrant Status; Supplement A to Form I-539A.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-539; I-539A; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. This 
form is used by nonimmigrants to apply for an extension of stay, for a 
change to another nonimmigrant classification, or to obtain V 
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-539 
(paper) is 174,289 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.817 
hours, the estimated total number of respondents for the information 
collection I-539 (electronic) is 74,696 and the estimated hour burden 
per response is 1.083 hours; and the estimated total number of 
respondents for the information collection I-539A is 54,375 and the 
estimated hour burden per response is 0.5 hours; biometrics processing 
is 186,738 total respondents requiring an estimated 1.17 hours per 
response.
    (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 643,250 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 $42,700,928.
USCIS Form I-566
    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 1615-0027 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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: Interagency Record of Request--A, 
G or NATO Dependent Employment Authorization or Change/Adjustment to/
from A, G or NATO Status.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-566; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. The data 
on this form is used by Department of State (DOS) to certify to USCIS 
eligibility of dependents of A or G principals requesting employment 
authorization, as well as for NATO/Headquarters, Supreme Allied 
Commander Transformation (NATO/HQ SACT) to certify to USCIS similar 
eligibility for dependents of NATO principals. DOS also uses this form 
to certify to USCIS that certain A, G, or NATO nonimmigrants may change 
their status to another nonimmigrant status. USCIS, on the other hand, 
uses data on this form in the adjudication of change or adjustment of 
status applications from aliens in A, G, or NATO classifications and 
following any such adjudication informs DOS of the results by use of 
this form. The information provided on this form continues to ensure 
effective interagency communication among the three governmental 
departments--the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), DOS, and the 
Department of Defense (DOD)--as well as with NATO/HQ SACT. These 
departments and organizations utilize this form to facilitate the 
uniform collection and review of information necessary to determine an 
alien's eligibility for the requested immigration benefit. This form 
also ensures that the information collected is communicated among DHS, 
DOS, DOD, and NATO/HQ SACT regarding each other's findings or actions.
    (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-566 
is 5,800 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.337 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 7,755 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 $710,500.
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. 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;

[[Page 573]]

    (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, for example, 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; and Supplement 3, 
Request for Action on Approved Form I-600A/I-600.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of 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.
    (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 determine the 
prospective adoptive parent's eligibility to file Form I-600A and their 
suitability and eligibility to properly parent an orphan. 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 suitability 
determination; 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 or 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 0.817 hours; the 
estimated total number of respondents for the information collection 
Form I-600A is 2,000 and the estimated hour burden per response is 
0.817 hours; the estimated total number of respondents for the 
information collection Form I-600/I-600A 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 69,977 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-601
    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 1615-0029 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 Waiver of Grounds 
of Inadmissibility.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-601; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. Form I-
601 is necessary for USCIS to determine whether the applicant is 
eligible for a waiver of inadmissibility under section 212 of the Act. 
Furthermore, this information collection is used by individuals who are 
seeking Temporary Protected Status (TPS).
    (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-601 
is 17,000 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.567 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 26,639 hours.

[[Page 574]]

    (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 $6,311,250.
USCIS Form I-601A
    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 1615-0123 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 Provisional 
Unlawful Presence Waiver.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-601A; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. Section 
212(a)(9)(B)(i)(I) and (II) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA 
or the Act) provides for the inadmissibility of certain individuals who 
have accrued unlawful presence in the United States. There is also a 
waiver provision incorporated into section 212(a)(9)(B)(v) of the Act, 
which allows the Secretary of Homeland Security to exercise discretion 
to waive the unlawful presence grounds of inadmissibility on a case-by-
case basis. The information collected from an applicant on an 
Application for Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver of 
Inadmissibility, Form I-601A, is necessary for U.S. Citizenship and 
Immigration Services (USCIS) to determine not only whether the 
applicant meets the requirements to participate in the streamlined 
waiver process provided by regulation, but also whether the applicant 
is eligible to receive the provisional unlawful presence waiver.
    (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-601A 
is 63,000 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.317 hours: 
the estimated total number of respondents for the collection of 
biometrics is 63,000 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 156,681 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 $3,212,390.
USCIS Form I-602
    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 1615-0069 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 by Refugee for Waiver 
of Grounds of Excludability.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-602; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. The data 
collected on the Application by Refugee for Waiver of Inadmissibility 
Grounds, Form I-602, will be used by USCIS to determine eligibility for 
waivers, and to report to Congress the reasons for granting waivers.
    (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-602 
is 240 and the estimated hour burden per response is 7.917 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 1,900 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 $30,900.
USCIS Form I-612
    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 1615-0030 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. Comments on this information

[[Page 575]]

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, for example, 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 Waiver of the 
Foreign Residence Requirement (Under Section 212(e) of the INA, as 
Amended).
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-612; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. This 
information collection is necessary and may be submitted only by an 
alien who believes that compliance with foreign residence requirements 
would impose exceptional hardship on his or her spouse or child who is 
a citizen of the United States, or a lawful permanent resident; or that 
returning to the country of his or her nationality or last permanent 
residence would subject him or her to persecution on account of race, 
religion, or political opinion. Certain aliens admitted to the United 
States as exchange visitors are subject to the foreign residence 
requirements of section 212(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
(the Act). Section 212(e) of the Act also provides for a waiver of the 
foreign residence requirements in certain instances.
    (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-612 
is 7,200 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.15 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 1,080 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 $882,000.
USCIS Form I-690; Supplement A
    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 1615-0032 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 Waiver of Grounds 
of Inadmissibility; Supplement A: Applicants with a Class A 
Tuberculosis Condition (As Defined by HHS Regulations).
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-690; Supplement A; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. 
Applicants for lawful permanent residence under INA sections 210 or 
245A who are inadmissible under certain grounds of inadmissibility at 
INA section 212(a) would use Form I-690 to seek a waiver of 
inadmissibility. USCIS uses the information provided through Form I-690 
to adjudicate waiver requests from individuals who are inadmissible to 
the United States. Based upon the instructions provided, a respondent 
can gather and submit the required documentation to USCIS for 
consideration of an inadmissibility waiver.
    (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-690 
is 30 and the estimated hour burden per response is 2.817 hours; the 
estimated total number of respondents for the information collection 
Supplement A is 11 and the estimated hour burden per response is 2 
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 107 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 $4,523.
USCIS Form I-698
    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 1615-0035 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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

[[Page 576]]

    (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, for example, 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 to Adjust Status from 
Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A of the INA).
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-698; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. The data 
collected on Form I-698 is used by USCIS to determine the eligibility 
to adjust an applicant's residence status.
    (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-698 
is 100 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.067 hours; the 
estimated total number of respondents for biometrics processing is 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 224 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 $49,000.
USCIS Form I-751
    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 1615-0038 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 Remove Conditions on 
Residence.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-751; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. The 
information collected on Form I-751 is used by U.S. Citizenship and 
Immigration Services (USCIS) to verify the alien's status and determine 
whether he or she is eligible to have the conditions on his or her 
status removed. Form I-751 serves the purpose of standardizing requests 
for benefits and ensuring that basic information required to assess 
eligibility is provided by petitioners.
    (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-751 
is 153,000 and the estimated hour burden per response is 4.387 hours; 
the estimated total number of respondents for the information 
collection biometrics is 306,000 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 1,029,231 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 $19,698,750.
USCIS Form I-765; I-765WS
    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. 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, for example, 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; I-765 Worksheet.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-765; I-765WS; 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 a 
noncitizen 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. Noncitizens 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

[[Page 577]]

respond: The estimated total number of respondents for the information 
collection I-765 paper filing is 1,830,347 and the estimated hour 
burden per response is 4.317 hours; the estimated total number of 
respondents for the information collection I-765 online filing is 
455,653 and the estimated hour burden per response is 4 hours; the 
estimated total number of respondents for the information collection I-
765WS is 302,000 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.5 
hours; the estimated total number of respondents for the information 
collection biometrics submission is 302,535 and the estimated hour 
burden per response is 1.17 hours; the estimated total number of 
respondents for the information collection passport photos is 2,286,000 
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 11,372,186 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 $400,895,820.
USCIS Form I-765V
    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 1615-0137 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 for Abused Nonimmigrant Spouse.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-765V; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. U.S. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will use Form I-765V, 
Application for Employment Authorization for Abused Nonimmigrant 
Spouse, to collect the information that is necessary to determine if 
the applicant is eligible for an initial EAD or renewal EAD as a 
qualifying abused nonimmigrant spouse. Aliens are required to possess 
an EAD as evidence of work authorization. To be authorized for 
employment, an alien must be lawfully admitted for permanent residence 
or authorized to be so employed by the INA or under regulations issued 
by DHS. Pursuant to statutory or regulatory authorization, certain 
classes of aliens are authorized to be employed in the United States 
without restrictions as to location or type of employment as a 
condition of their admission or subsequent change to one of the 
indicated classes. USCIS may determine the validity period assigned to 
any document issued evidencing an alien's authorization to work in the 
United States. USCIS also collects biometric information from EAD 
applicants to verify the applicant's identity, check or update their 
background information, and produce the EAD card.
    (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-765V 
is 350 and the estimated hour burden per response is 3.567 hours; the 
estimated total number of respondents for the information collection 
biometric submission is 350 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 1,658 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 $87,500.
USCIS Form I-817
    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 1615-0005 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 Benefits Under 
the Family Unity Program Application.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-817; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. The 
information collected will be used to determine whether the applicant 
meets the eligibility requirements for benefits under 8 CFR 236.14 and 
245a.33.
    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount 
of time

[[Page 578]]

estimated for an average respondent to respond: The estimated total 
number of respondents for the information collection Form I-817 is 
1,000 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.817 hours; the 
estimated number of respondents providing biometrics is 1,000 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 2,987 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 $122,500.
USCIS Form I-821
    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 1615-0043 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 Temporary 
Protected Status.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-821; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. Form I-
821 used by USCIS to gather information necessary to determine if an 
applicant is eligible for Temporary Protected Status.
    (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-821 
(paper filed) is 453,600 and the estimated hour burden per response is 
2.227 hours; the estimated total number of respondents for the 
information collection Form I-821 (online filed) is 113,400 and the 
estimated hour burden per response is 1.92 hours; the estimated total 
number of respondents for the information collection Biometrics 
Submission is 567,000 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 1,891,285 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 $69,457,500.
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. 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, for example, 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: Consideration of Deferred Action 
for Childhood Arrivals.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of 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, certain noncitizens may use this 
form to request that USCIS exercise its prosecutorial discretion on a 
case-by-case basis to defer action in their case.
    (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-821D 
Initial Request (paper) is 112,254 and the estimated hour burden per 
response is 2.817 hours. The estimated total number of respondents for 
the information collection I-821D Renewal Request (paper) is 221,167 
and the estimated hour burden per response is 2.817 hours. The 
estimated total number of respondents for the information collection I-
821D Renewal Request (Online) is 55,292 and the estimated hour burden 
per response is 2.482 hours. The estimated total number of respondents 
for the information collection I-821D Biometrics submission is 388,713 
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 1,531,259 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 $33,040,605.
USCIS Form I-824
    DHS and USCIS invite the general public and other Federal agencies 
to comment on the impact to the proposed

[[Page 579]]

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 1615-0044 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 Action on an 
Approved Application.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-824; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. This 
information collection is used to request a duplicate approval notice, 
as well as to notify and to verify with the U.S. Consulate that a 
petition has been approved or that a person has been adjusted to 
permanent resident status.
    (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-824 
is 10,571 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.237 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 2,505 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 $1,361,016.
USCIS Form I-881
    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 1615-0072 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 Suspension of 
Deportation or Special Rule Cancellation of Removal (Pursuant to Sec. 
203 of Pub. L. 105-100).
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-881; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. The data 
collected on the Form I-881 is used by Department of Homeland Security 
(DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) asylum 
officers, Department of Justice (DOJ), EOIR immigration judges, and 
Board of Immigration Appeals board members. The Form I-881 is used to 
determine eligibility for suspension of deportation or special rule 
cancellation of removal under Section 203 of NACARA. The form serves 
the purpose of standardizing requests for the benefits and ensuring 
that basic information required for assessing eligibility is provided 
by the applicants.
    (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-881 
is 520 and the estimated hour burden per response is 11.817 hours; the 
estimated total number of respondents for the information collection 
Biometrics Submission is 858 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 7,149 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 $258,505.
USCIS Form I-90
    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 1615-0082 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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

[[Page 580]]

use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other 
technological collection techniques or other forms of information 
technology, for example, 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 to Replace Permanent 
Resident Card.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-90; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. Form I-
90 is used by USCIS to determine eligibility to replace a Lawful 
Permanent Resident Card.
    (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-90 
(paper filed) is 444,601 and the estimated hour burden per response is 
1.817 hours; the estimated total number of respondents for the 
information collection I-90 (electronic) is 296,400 and the estimated 
hour burden per response is 1.59 hours; and the estimated total number 
of respondents for the information collection biometrics is 741,001 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 Form I-90 is 2,146,087 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 $254,163,343.
USCIS Form I-907
    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 1615-0048 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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: Request for Premium Processing 
Service.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-907; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. USCIS 
uses the data collected through this form to process a request for 
premium processing. The form serves the purpose of standardizing 
requests for premium processing and will ensure that basic information 
required to assess eligibility is provided by the employers/
petitioners.
    (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-907 
is 815,773 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.397 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 323,862 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 $202,923,534.
USCIS Form I-910
    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 1615-0114 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 Civil Surgeon 
Designation.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-910; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Businesses or nonprofits. This 
information collection is required to determine whether a physician 
meets the statutory and regulatory requirements for civil surgeon 
designation. For example, all documents are reviewed to determine 
whether the physician has a currently valid medical license and whether 
the physician has had any disciplinary action taken against him or her 
by the medical licensing authority of the U.S. state(s) or U.S. 
territories in which he or she practices. If the Application for Civil 
Surgeon Designation (Form I-910) is approved, the physician is included 
in USCIS's public Civil Surgeon Locator and is authorized to complete 
Form I-

[[Page 581]]

693 (OMB Control Number 1615-0033) for an applicant's adjustment of 
status.
    (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-910 is 470 
and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.817 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 854 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 $24,205.
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. 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, for example, 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 Fee Waiver.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of 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 demonstrates that they are 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 them 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 Form I-912 
is 602,400 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.17. The 
estimated total number of respondents for the information collection 8 
CFR 103.7(d) Director's Exception Request is 128 and the estimated hour 
burden per response is 1.17.
    (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 704,958 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 $2,259,480.
USCIS Form I-914; I-914A; I-914B
    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 1615-0099 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 T nonimmigrant 
status; Supplement A, Application for Family Member of T-1 Recipient; 
Supplement B, Declaration of Law Enforcement Officer for Victim of 
Trafficking in Persons.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-914; I-914A; I-914B; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households; Federal 
Government; State, local or Tribal Government. The information on all 
three parts of the form will be used to determine whether applicants 
meet the eligibility requirements for benefits. This application 
incorporates information pertinent to eligibility under the Victims of 
Trafficking and Violence Protection Act (VTVPA), Public Law 106-386, 
and a request for employment 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 Form I-914 
is 1,310 and the estimated hour burden per response is 2.63 hours; the 
estimated total number of respondents for the information

[[Page 582]]

collection Form I-914A is 1,120 and the estimated hour burden per 
response is 1.083 hour; the estimated total number of respondents for 
the information collection Form I-914B Law Enforcement Officer 
completion activity is 459 and the estimated hour burden per response 
is 3.58 hour; the estimated total number of respondents for the 
information collection Form I-914B Contact by Respondent to Law 
Enforcement is 459 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.25 
hour; the estimated total number of respondents for the information 
collection biometrics submission is 2,430 and the estimated hour burden 
per response is 1.17 hour.
    (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 9,259 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 $0.
USCIS Form I-918; I-918A; I-918B
    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 1615-0104 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 U Nonimmigrant 
Status; Supplement A, Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U-1 
Recipient; Supplement B, U Nonimmigrant Status Certification.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-918; I-918A; I-918B; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households; Federal 
Government; or State, local or Tribal Government. This petition permits 
victims of certain qualifying criminal activity and their immediate 
family members to apply for temporary nonimmigrant classification. This 
nonimmigrant classification provides temporary immigration benefits, 
potentially leading to permanent resident status, to certain victims of 
criminal activity who: suffered substantial mental or physical abuse as 
a result of having been a victim of criminal activity; have information 
regarding the criminal activity; and assist Government officials in 
investigating and prosecuting such criminal activity.
    (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-918 is 
29,400 and the estimated hour burden per response is 5 hours. The 
estimated total number of respondents for the information collection I-
918A is 17,900 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.5 hour. 
The estimated total number of respondents for the information 
collection I-918B is 29,400 and the estimated hour burden per response 
is 1 hour. The estimated total number of respondents for the 
information collection biometrics submission is 47,300 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 258,591 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 $201,025.
USCIS Form I-929
    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 1615-0106 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 Qualifying Family 
Member of a U-1 Nonimmigrant.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-929; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and Households. Section 
245(m) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (Act) allows certain 
qualifying family members who have never held U nonimmigrant status to 
seek lawful permanent residence or apply for immigrant visas. Before 
such family members may apply for adjustment of status or seek 
immigrant visas, the U-1 nonimmigrant who has been granted adjustment 
of status must file an immigrant petition on behalf of the qualifying 
family member using Form I-929. Form I-929 is necessary for USCIS

[[Page 583]]

to determine whether the eligibility requirements and conditions for a 
qualifying family member are met.
    (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-929 
is 1,500 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.817 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 1,226 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 $183,750.
USCIS Form I-941
    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 1615-0136 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 Entrepreneur 
Parole.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: I-941; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. 
Entrepreneurs can use this form to make an initial request for parole 
based upon significant public benefit; make a subsequent request for 
parole for an additional period; or file an amended application to 
notify USCIS of a material change.
    (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-941 
is 2,940 and the estimated hour burden per response is 4.517 hours; the 
estimated total number of respondents for the information collection 
biometrics submission is 2,940 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 16,720 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 $1,440,600.
USCIS Form N-336
    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 1615-0050 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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: Request for a Hearing on a 
Decision in Naturalization Proceedings Under Section 336.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: N-336; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. Form N-
336 is used by an individual whose Form N-400, Application for 
Naturalization was denied, to request a hearing before an immigration 
officer on the denial of the N-400. USCIS uses the information 
submitted on Form N-336 to locate the requestor's file and schedule a 
hearing in the correct jurisdiction. It allows USCIS to determine if 
there is an underlying Form N-400, Application for Naturalization that 
was denied, to warrant the filing of Form N-336. The information 
collected also allows USCIS to determine if a member of the U.S. armed 
forces has filed the appeal.
    (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 N-336 
(paper filed) is 3,788 and the estimated hour burden per response is 
2.567 hours; the estimated total number of respondents for the 
information collection Form N-336 (online filed) is 1,263 and the 
estimated hour burden per response is 2.5 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 12,882 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 $2,601,265.
USCIS Form N-400
    DHS and USCIS invite the general public and other Federal agencies 
to comment on the impact to the proposed collection of information. In 
accordance

[[Page 584]]

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 1615-0052 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 Naturalization.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: N-400; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. Form N-
400, Application for Naturalization, allows USCIS to fulfill its 
mission of fairly adjudicating naturalization applications and only 
naturalizing statutorily eligible individuals. Naturalization is the 
process by which U.S. citizenship is granted to a foreign citizen or 
national after he or she fulfills the requirements established by 
Congress in the INA.
    (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 N-400 
(paper filed) is 567,314 and the estimated hour burden per response is 
8.987 hours; the estimated total number of respondents for the 
information collection N-400 (online filed) is 214,186 and the 
estimated hour burden per response is 3.5 hours; the estimated total 
number of respondents for the information collection biometrics 
submission is 778,000 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 6,758,362 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 $346,768,928.
USCIS Form N-470
    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 1615-0056 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 to Preserve Residence 
for Naturalization Purposes.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: N-470; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. The 
information collected on Form N-470 will be used to determine whether 
an alien who intends to be absent from the United States for a period 
of one year or more is eligible to preserve residence for 
naturalization purposes.
    (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 N-470 
is 120 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.417 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 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 $14,700.
USCIS Form N-565
    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 1615-0091 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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

[[Page 585]]

other forms of information technology, for example, 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 Replacement of 
Naturalization/Citizenship Document.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: N-565; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. U.S. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) uses Form N-565 to 
determine the applicant's eligibility for a replacement document. An 
applicant may file for a replacement if they were issued one of the 
documents described above and it was lost, mutilated, or destroyed; if 
the document is incorrect due to a typographical or clerical error by 
USCIS; if the applicant's name was changed by a marriage, divorce, 
annulment, or court order after the document was issued and the 
applicant now seeks a document in the new name; or if the applicant is 
seeking a change of the gender listed on their document after obtaining 
a court order, a government-issued document, or a letter from a 
licensed health care professional recognizing that the applicant's 
gender is different from that listed on their current document. The 
only document that can be replaced on the basis of a change to the 
applicant's date of birth, as evidenced by a court order or a document 
issued by the U.S. Government or the government of a U.S. state, is the 
Certificate of Citizenship. If the applicant is a naturalized citizen 
who desires to obtain recognition as a citizen of the United States by 
a foreign country, he or she may apply for a special certificate for 
that purpose.
    (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 N-565 
(paper-filed) is 13,270 and the estimated hour burden per response is 
1.147 hours; the estimated total number of respondents for the 
information collection N-565 (online filed) is 13,270 and the estimated 
hour burden per response is 0.917 hours; the estimated total number of 
respondents for the photograph appointment is 26,340 (accounts for an 
estimated 200 respondents that file from overseas and do not need to 
attend a photo appointment) 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 58,207 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 $3,417,026.
USCIS Form N-600
    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 1615-0057 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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 Certification of 
Citizenship.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: N-600; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. Form N-
600 collects information from applicants who are requesting a 
Certificate of Citizenship because they acquired United States 
citizenship either by birth abroad to a U.S. citizen parent(s), 
adoption by a U. S. citizen parent(s), or after meeting eligibility 
requirements including the naturalization of a foreign-born parent. 
Form N-600 can also be filed by a parent or legal guardian on behalf of 
a minor child. The form standardizes requests for the benefit and 
ensures that basic information required to assess eligibility is 
provided by applicants.
    (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 N-600 (paper 
filing) is 27,500 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.397 
hours; the estimated total number of respondents for the information 
collection N-600 (online filed) is 27,500 and the estimated hour burden 
per response is 0.75 hours; the estimated total number of respondents 
for the information collection biometrics submission is 36,500 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 101,748 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 $7,081,250.
USCIS Form N-600K
    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 1615-0087 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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;

[[Page 586]]

    (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, for example, 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 Citizenship and 
Issuance of Certificate under Section 322.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: N-600K; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals and households. Form N-
600K is used by children who regularly reside in a foreign country to 
claim U.S. citizenship based on eligibility criteria met by their U.S. 
citizen parent(s) or grandparent(s). The form may be used by children 
under age 18. USCIS uses information collected on this form to 
determine that the child has met all of the eligibility requirements 
for naturalization under section 322 of the Immigration and Nationality 
Act (INA). If determined eligible, USCIS will naturalize and issue the 
child a Certificate of Citizenship before the child reaches age 18.
    (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 N-600K 
(paper filed) is 1,300 and the estimated hour burden per response is 
1.897 hours; the estimated total number of respondents for the 
information collection Form N-600K (online filed) is 1,700 and the 
estimated hour burden per response is 1.5 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 5,016 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 $386,250.
USCIS Form OMB-64
    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 1615-0144 in the body of the letter and 
the agency name. 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, for example, 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: H-1B Registration Tool.
    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of DHS 
sponsoring the collection: OMB-64; USCIS.
    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as 
well as a brief abstract: Primary: Business or other for-profit. USCIS 
will use the data collected through the H-1B Registration Tool to 
select a sufficient number of registrations projected to meet the 
applicable H-1B cap allocations and to notify registrants whether their 
registration was selected.
    (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 business or other for-profit respondents for the 
information collection H-1B Registration Tool is 35,500 with an 
estimated 3 responses per respondents and an estimated hour burden per 
response of 0.5167 hours. The estimated total number of attorney 
respondents for the information collection H-1B Registration Tool is 
4,500 with an estimated 38 responses per respondents and an estimated 
hour burden per response of 0.5167 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 143,384 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 $0.00. Any costs to respondents 
are captured in the Form I-129 information collection (OMB control 
number 1615-009).
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 projects 1,666,500 Form I-765 filings while 
the estimated total number of respondents for the information 
collection I-765 is 2,179,494. As stated in section V.B.1.a of this 
preamble, the VPC forecasts USCIS workload volume 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 3-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 3 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.

[[Page 587]]

I. National Environmental Policy Act

    DHS Directive 023-01 Rev. 01 (Directive) and Instruction Manual 
023-01-001-01 Rev. 01 (Instruction Manual) establish the policies and 
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 
through 1508.
    The CEQ regulations allow Federal agencies to establish, with CEQ 
review and concurrence, categories of actions (``categorical 
exclusions'') that experience has shown do not have a significant 
effect on the human environment and, therefore, do not require an 
Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement. 40 CFR 
1507.3(e)(2)(ii), 1501.4.
    The Instruction Manual establishes categorical exclusions that DHS 
has found to have no such effect. See Appendix A, Table 1. Under DHS 
NEPA implementing procedures, for a proposed action to be categorically 
excluded it must 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. Instruction Manual section V.B(2)(a)-
(c).
    This proposed rule implements the authority in the INA to establish 
fees to fund immigration and naturalization services of USCIS.
    DHS has determined that this proposed rule does not individually or 
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment because 
it clearly fits within categorical exclusions A3(a) and (d) in Appendix 
A of the Instruction Manual established for rules of a strictly 
administrative or procedural nature and actions that interpret or amend 
an existing regulation without changing its environmental effect.
    This proposed rule is not part of a larger action and presents no 
extraordinary circumstances creating the potential for significant 
environmental effects. Therefore, this proposed rule is categorically 
excluded from further NEPA review.

J. Family Assessment

    Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family 
Policymaking Assessment for any rule that may affect family well-being. 
Agencies must assess whether the regulatory action: (1) Impacts the 
stability or safety of the family, particularly in terms of marital 
commitment; (2) impacts the authority of parents in the education, 
nurture, and supervision of their children; (3) helps the family 
perform its functions; (4) affects disposable income or poverty of 
families and children; (5) if the regulatory action financially impacts 
families, are justified; (6) may be carried out by State or local 
government or by the family; and (7) establishes a policy concerning 
the relationship between the behavior and personal responsibility of 
youth and the norms of society. If the determination is affirmative, 
then the Agency must prepare an impact assessment to address criteria 
specified in the law. DHS has no data that indicate that this proposed 
rule will have any impacts on disposable income or the poverty of 
certain families and children, including U.S. citizen children. DHS 
acknowledges that this proposal would increase the fees that families 
must submit and thus it may affect the disposable income for certain 
families. DHS has provided a process to waive fees for immigration 
benefits when the person submitting the request is unable to pay the 
fee. In addition, the proposed rule may provide USCIS with the funds 
necessary to provide free services to certain disadvantaged 
populations, including abused children and spouses, refugees, and 
victims of criminal activity or human trafficking. DHS believes that 
the benefits of the new fees justify the financial impact on the 
family, that this rulemaking's impact is justified, and no further 
actions are required. DHS also determined that this proposed rule will 
not have any impact on the autonomy or integrity of the family as an 
institution.

List of Subjects

8 CFR Part 103

    Administrative practice and procedure, Authority delegations 
(Government agencies), Freedom of information, Privacy, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, 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 212

    Administrative practice and procedure, Aliens, Immigration, 
Passports and visas, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

8 CFR Part 214

    Administrative practice and procedure, Aliens, Cultural exchange 
program, Employment, Foreign officials, Health professions, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements, Students.

8 CFR Part 240

    Administrative practice and procedure, Aliens.

8 CFR Part 244

    Administrative practice and procedure, Immigration.

8 CFR Part 245

    Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

8 CFR Part 245a

    Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

8 CFR Part 264

    Aliens, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

8 CFR Part 274a

    Administrative practice and procedure, Aliens, Employment, 
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    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

0
1. The authority citation for part 103 is revised 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.); Pub. L. 112-54, 125 Stat 550 (8 U.S.C. 1185 
note); E.O. 12356, 47 FR 14874, 15557, 3 CFR, 1982 Comp., p. 166; 8 
CFR part 2.
0
2. Section 103.2 is amended by revising the fourth sentence of 
paragraph (a)(1) and paragraphs (a)(7)(ii)(D) and (b)(19)(iii)(A) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  103.2  Submission and adjudication of benefit requests.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * * Filing fees generally are non-refundable regardless of 
the outcome of the benefit request, or how much time the adjudication 
requires, and any decision to refund a fee is at the discretion of 
USCIS. * * *
* * * * *
    (7) * * *
    (ii) * * *

[[Page 588]]

    (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. Credit cards that are declined will not 
be submitted a second time. 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) * * *
    (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 or their attorney or 
accredited representative of record, as specified on the form 
instructions.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 103.7 is revised and republished to read as follows:


Sec.  103.7   Fees.

    (a) Department of Justice (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 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) must include an additional $30 for DHS to collect, store, and 
use biometric information.
    (3) Waiver of court fees. An immigration judge may waive any fees 
prescribed under this chapter for cases under their jurisdiction to the 
extent provided in 8 CFR 1003.8, 1003.24, and 1103.7.
    (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 port-of-entry: $6.00.
    (5) Form I-94W. For issuance of Nonimmigrant Visa Waiver Arrival/
Departure Form at a land border port-of-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. The application fee may be waived by 
DHS.
    (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 before 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 I-290B filed with the Student and Exchange Visitor Program 
(SEVP): $675.
0
4. Section 103.17 is revised and republished to read as follows:


Sec.  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. When a biometric services fee 
is required, USCIS may reject a benefit request submitted without the 
correct biometric services.

[[Page 589]]

0
5. Section 103.40 is revised and republished to read as follows:


Sec.  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. USCIS provides on its website at https://www.uscis.gov/records/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:
    (1) Full name (including variant spellings of the name and/or 
aliases, if any).
    (2) Date of birth, at least as specific as a year.
    (3) 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:
    (1) Date of arrival in the United States.
    (2) Residence address at time of naturalization.
    (3) Names of parents, spouse, and children if applicable and 
available.
    (e) Additional information required to retrieve records. For a 
Genealogy Records Request, requests for copies of historical records or 
files must identify the record by number or other specific data used by 
the Genealogy Program Office to retrieve the record as follows:
    (1) C-Files must be identified by a naturalization certificate 
number.
    (2) Forms AR-2 and A-Files numbered below 8 million must be 
identified by Alien Registration Number.
    (3) Visa Files must be identified by the Visa File Number. Registry 
Files must be identified by the Registry File Number (for example, R-
12345).
    (f) 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).
    (g) 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.
    (h) 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.
0
6. Part 106 is revised and republished to read as follows:

PART 106--USCIS FEE SCHEDULE

Sec. 106.1 Fee requirements.
106.2 Fees.
106.3 Fee waivers and exemptions.
106.4 Premium processing service.
106.5 Authority to certify records.
106.6 DHS severability.

    Authority:  8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1254a, 1254b, 1304, 1356; 48 
U.S.C. 1806; Pub. L. 107- 296, 116 Stat. 2135 (6 U.S.C. 101 note); 
Pub. L. 115-218, 132 Stat. 1547; Pub. L. 116-159, 134 Stat. 709.


Sec.  106.1   Fee requirements.

    (a) Fees must be submitted with any USCIS 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 in 
Sec.  106.2.
    (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 paragraph (c) would apply if any fee submitted is not 
honored. Other fees that were paid for a benefit request that is 
revoked under this paragraph (c) 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.
    (d) DHS is not responsible for financial instruments that expire 
before they are deposited. USCIS may reject any filing for which 
required payment cannot be processed due to expiration of the financial 
instrument.
    (e) Fees paid to USCIS using a credit card are not subject to 
dispute, chargeback, forced refund, or return to the cardholder for any 
reason except at the discretion of USCIS.


Sec.  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.
    (i) When filed online: $455.
    (ii) When filed on paper: $465.
    (iii) If the applicant was issued a card but never received it: No 
fee.
    (iv) If the applicant's card was issued with incorrect information 
because of DHS error and the applicant is filing for a replacement: No 
fee.
    (v) If the applicant has reached their 14th birthday and their 
existing card will expire after their 16th birthday: No fee.
    (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: $680.

[[Page 590]]

    (i) For nonimmigrant member of 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; and
    (iv) For replacement for DHS error: No fee.
    (3) Petition or Application for a Nonimmigrant Worker, Form I-129. 
For filing a petition or application for a nonimmigrant worker:
    (i) Petition for H-1B Nonimmigrant Worker or H-1B1 Free Trade 
Nonimmigrant Worker: $780.
    (ii) Petition for H-2A Nonimmigrant Worker with 1 to 25 named 
beneficiaries: $1,090.
    (iii) Petition for H-2A Nonimmigrant Worker with only unnamed 
beneficiaries: $530.
    (iv) Petition for H-2B Nonimmigrant Worker with 1 to 25 named 
beneficiaries: $1,080.
    (v) Petition for H-2B Nonimmigrant Worker with only unnamed 
beneficiaries: $580.
    (vi) Petition for L Nonimmigrant Worker: $1,385.
    (vii) Petition for O Nonimmigrant Worker with 1 to 25 named 
beneficiaries: $1,055.
    (viii) Petition or Application for E, H-3, P, Q, R, or TN 
Nonimmigrant Worker with 1 to 25 named beneficiaries: $1,015.
    (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): $1,015.
    (i) Additional fees in paragraph (c) of this section may apply.
    (ii) Semiannual Report for CW-1 Employers (Form I-129CWR): No fee.
    (5) Petition for Alien Fianc[eacute](e), Form I-129F. (i) For 
filing a petition to classify a nonimmigrant as a fianc[eacute]e or 
fianc[eacute] under section 214(d) of the Act: $720.
    (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.
    (i) When filed online: $710.
    (ii) When filed on paper: $820.
    (7) Application for Travel Document, Form I-131. (i) Refugee Travel 
Document for asylee and lawful permanent resident who obtained such 
status as an asylee 16 years or older: $165.
    (ii) Refugee Travel Document for asylee and lawful permanent 
resident who obtained such status as an asylee under the age of 16: 
$135.
    (iii) Advance Parole, Reentry Permit, and other travel documents: 
$630.
    (iv) There are no fees for a travel document 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.
    (v) There are no fees for parole requests from current or former 
U.S. armed forces service members.
    (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: $575.
    (9) Declaration of Financial Support, Form I-134. No fee.
    (10) 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: $715.
    (11) 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: 
$930.
    (12) Application for Advance Permission to Enter as a Nonimmigrant, 
Form I-192. For filing an application for discretionary relief under 
section 212(d)(3), (13), or (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: $1,100.
    (13) Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa, Form I-193. 
For filing an application for waiver of passport and/or visa: $695.
    (14) 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: $1,395.
    (15) 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, and for filing a motion to review or reconsider a USCIS 
decision: $800. The fee will be the same for appeal of or motion on a 
denial of a benefit request with one or multiple beneficiaries. There 
is no fee for conditional permanent residents who filed a waiver of the 
joint filing requirement based on battery or extreme cruelty and filed 
a ``Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) when their Petition to 
Remove the Conditions on Residence'' (Form I-751) was denied.
    (16) Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant, Form 
I-360. $515. There is no fee for the following:
    (i) A petition seeking classification as an Amerasian;
    (ii) A petition seeking immigrant classification as a Violence 
Against Women Act (VAWA) self-petitioner;
    (iii) A petition for Special Immigrant Juvenile classification;
    (iv) A petition seeking special immigrant classification as Afghan 
or Iraqi translator or interpreter, Iraqi national employed by or on 
behalf of the U.S. Government, or Afghan national employed by or on 
behalf of the U.S. Government or employed by the International Security 
Assistance Force (ISAF); or a surviving spouse or child of such a 
person; or
    (v) A petition for a person who served honorably on active duty in 
the U.S. armed forces filing under section 101(a)(27)(K) of the Act.
    (17) Affidavit of Financial Support and Intent to Petition for 
Legal Custody for Public Law 97-359 Amerasian, Form I-361. No fee.
    (18) Request to Enforce Affidavit of Financial Support and Intent 
to Petition for Legal Custody for Public Law 97-359 Amerasian, Form I-
363. No fee.
    (19) Record of Abandonment of Lawful Permanent Resident Status, 
Form I-407. No fee.
    (20) 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: $1,540. There is no 
fee for the following:
    (i) An applicant who is in deportation, exclusion, or removal 
proceedings before an immigration judge, and the court waives the 
application fee.
    (ii) An applicant who served honorably on active duty in the U.S. 
armed forces who is filing under section 101(a)(27)(K) of the Act.
    (21) 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

[[Page 591]]

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, 
including:
    (i) If applicant is unmarried and under 17 years of age: No fee.
    (ii) If the applicant is the spouse or unmarried child under 21 
years of age of a legalized alien and attaches a copy of a USCIS 
receipt or approval notice for a properly filed Form I-817, 
``Application for Family Unity Benefits'': No fee.
    (22) Confirmation of Bona Fide Job Offer or Request for Job 
Portability Under INA Section 204(j), Form I-485J. No fee.
    (23) Request for Waiver of Certain Rights, Privileges, Exemptions, 
and Immunities, Form I-508. No fee.
    (24) Immigrant Petition by Standalone or Regional Center Investor, 
Forms I-526 and I-526E. (i) Immigrant Petition by Standalone Investor, 
Form I-526: $11,160.
    (ii) Immigrant Petition by Regional Center Investor, Form I-526E: 
$11,160.
    (25) Application To Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status, Form I-539. 
(i) When filing online: $525.
    (ii) When filing on paper: $620.
    (iii) There is no fee for the following:
    (A) Nonimmigrant A, G, and NATO;
    (B) T nonimmigrant; and
    (C) U nonimmigrant if filed before the petitioner files an 
Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (Form I-
485).
    (26) Interagency Record of Request--A, G, or NATO Dependent 
Employment Authorization or Change/Adjustment To/From A, G, or NATO 
Status, Form I-566. No fee.
    (27) Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal, Form I-
589. No fee.
    (28) Registration for Classification as a Refugee, Form I-590. No 
fee.
    (29) 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: $920.
    (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 paragraph (a)(29)(iii) of this section, 
if more than one Form I-600 is filed during the Form I-600A approval 
period, the fee is $920 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.
    (30) 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: $920.
    (31) Request for Action on Approved Form I-600A/I-600, Form I-600A/
I-600 Supplement 3. $455.
    (i) This filing fee:
    (A) Is not charged if Form I-600A/I-600 Supplement 3 is filed to 
obtain a first-time 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.
    (B) Is charged if Form I-600A/I-600 Supplement 3 is filed to 
request a new approval notice based on a significant change and updated 
home study unless a first-time extension of the Form I-600A approval or 
first-time change of non-Hague Adoption Convention country is also 
being requested on the same Supplement 3.
    (C) Is charged for 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 permitted with Form I-600A/I-600 Supplement 3 with the 
filing fee.
    (ii) Form I-600A/I-600 Supplement 3 cannot be used to:
    (A) 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.
    (B) 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 the 
applicant previously changed countries.
    (iii) Form I-600A/I-600 Supplement 3 may only be used to request an 
increase in 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 whom 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.
    (32) Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility, Form I-
601. $1,050. No fee is required for filing an application to overcome 
the grounds of inadmissibility of the Act if filed concurrently with an 
application for adjustment of status under the provisions of the Act of 
October 28, 1977, and of this part.
    (33) Application for Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver, Form I-
601A. $1,105.
    (34) Application by Refugee for Waiver of Grounds of 
Inadmissibility, Form I-602. No fee.
    (35) Application for Waiver of the Foreign Residence Requirement 
(under Section 212(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as 
Amended), Form I-612. $1,100.
    (36) Application for Status as a Temporary Resident under Section 
245A of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Form I-687. $1,240.
    (37) 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 section 210 or 245A of the Act, 
or a petition under section 210A of the Act: $985.
    (38) Report of Medical Examination and Vaccination Record (Form I-
693). No fee.
    (39) 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 
section 210 or 245A of the Act, or a petition under section 210A of the 
Act: $1,155.
    (40) 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): $1,670. The adjustment date is 
the date of filing of the application for permanent residence or the 
applicant's eligibility date, whichever is later.
    (41) Refugee/Asylee Relative Petition, Form I-730. No fee.
    (42) Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence, Form I-751. For 
filing a petition to remove the conditions on residence based on 
marriage: $1,195.
    (43) Application for Employment Authorization, Form I-765. (i) When 
filed online: $555.
    (ii) When filed on paper: $650.
    (iii) There is no fee for an initial Employment Authorization 
Document for the following:
    (A) 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;

[[Page 592]]

    (B) Dependents of certain government and international 
organizations or NATO personnel;
    (C) N-8 (Parent of alien classed as SK3) and N-9 (Child of N-8) 
nonimmigrants;
    (D) Persons granted asylee status (AS1, AS6);
    (E) Citizen of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, or Palau;
    (F) Granted Withholding of Deportation or Removal;
    (G) Applicant for Asylum and Withholding of Deportation or Removal 
including derivatives;
    (H) Taiwanese dependents of Taipei Economic and Cultural 
Representative Office (TECRO) E-1 employees; and
    (I) Current or former U.S. armed forces service members.
    (iv) Request for replacement Employment Authorization Document 
based on USCIS error: No fee.
    (v) There is no fee for a renewal or replacement Employment 
Authorization Document for the following:
    (A) Any current Adjustment of Status or Registry applicant who 
filed for adjustment of status on or after July 30, 2007, and before 
[EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FINAL RULE], and paid the appropriate Form I-485 
filing fee;
    (B) Dependent of certain foreign government, international 
organization, or NATO personnel;
    (C) Citizen of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, or Palau; and
    (D) Granted withholding of deportation or removal.
    (vi) There is no fee for the Application for Employment 
Authorization for Abused Nonimmigrant Spouse, Form I-765V.
    (44) Petition to Classify Convention Adoptee as an Immediate 
Relative, Form I-800. For filing a petition to classify a Hague 
Convention adoptee as an immediate relative for issuance of an 
immigrant visa.
    (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)(44)(iii) of this section, 
if more than one Form I-800 is filed during the Form I-800A approval 
period, the fee is $920 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.
    (45) 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: $920.
    (46) Request for Action on Approved Application for Determination 
of Suitability to Adopt a Child from a Convention Country, Form I-800A, 
Supplement 3. $455. This filing fee:
    (i) Is not charged if Form I-800A Supplement 3 is filed to obtain a 
first-time extension of the approval of the Form I-800A or to obtain a 
first-time change of Hague Adoption Convention country during the Form 
I-800A approval period.
    (ii) Is charged if Form I-800A Supplement 3 is filed to request a 
new approval notice based on a significant change and updated home 
study unless a first-time 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.
    (iii) Is $455 for 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, permitted with the filing of a Form I-800A, Supplement 
3 and the required filing fee.
    (47) Application for Family Unity Benefits, Form I-817. For filing 
an application for voluntary departure under the Family Unity Program: 
$875.
    (48) 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.
    (49) Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, Form 
I-821D. $85.
    (50) Application for Action on an Approved Application or Petition, 
Form I-824. $675.
    (51) Petition by Investor to Remove Conditions on Permanent 
Resident Status, Form I-829. $9,525.
    (52) Inter-Agency Alien Witness and Informant Record, Form I-854. 
No fee.
    (53) Affidavit of Support Under Section 213A of the INA, Form I-
864. No fee.
    (i) Contract Between Sponsor and Household Member, Form I-864A. No 
fee.
    (ii) Affidavit of Support Under Section 213A of the INA, Form I-
864EZ. No fee.
    (iii) Request for Exemption for Intending Immigrant's Affidavit of 
Support, Form I-864W. No fee.
    (iv) Sponsor's Notice of Change of Address, Form I-865. No fee.
    (54) Application for Suspension of Deportation or Special Rule 
Cancellation of Removal (Pursuant to Section 203 of Pub. L. 105-100), 
Form I-881. (i) $340 for adjudication by DHS.
    (ii) $165 for adjudication by EOIR. If the Form I-881 is referred 
to the immigration court by DHS: No fee.
    (iii) If filing Form I-881 as a VAWA self-petitioner, including 
derivatives, as defined under section 101(a)(51)(F) of the Act: No fee.
    (55) Application for Authorization to Issue Certification for 
Health Care Workers, Form I-905. $230.
    (56) Request for Premium Processing Service, Form I-907. The 
Request for Premium Processing Service fee will be as provided in Sec.  
106.4.
    (57) Request for Civil Surgeon Designation, Form I-910. $1,230.
    (58) Request for Fee Waiver, Form I-912. No fee.
    (59) Application for T Nonimmigrant Status, Form I-914. No fee.
    (i) Supplement A to Form I-914, Application for Immigrant Family 
Member of a T-1 Recipient. No fee.
    (ii) Supplement B to Form I-914, Declaration of Law Enforcement 
Officer for Victim of Trafficking in Persons. No fee.
    (60) Petition for U Nonimmigrant Status, Form I-918. No fee.
    (i) Supplement A to Form I-918, Petition for Qualifying Family 
Member of U-1 Recipient. No fee.
    (ii) Supplement B to Form I-918, U Nonimmigrant Status 
Certification. No fee.
    (61) 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: $270.
    (62) Application for Entrepreneur Parole, Form I-941. For filing an 
application for parole for an entrepreneur: $1,200.
    (63) Request for Reduced Fee, Form I-942. Requesting a reduced fee 
for the naturalization application Form N-400: No fee.
    (64) Application for Regional Center Designation, Form I-956. 
$47,695.
    (65) Application for Approval of Investment in a Commercial 
Enterprise, Form I-956F. $47,695.
    (66) Regional Center Annual Statement, Form I-956G. To provide 
updated information and certify that a Regional Center under the 
Immigrant

[[Page 593]]

Investor Program has maintained its eligibility: $4,470.
    (b) N Forms--(1) Monthly Report on Naturalization Papers, Form N-4. 
No fee.
    (2) Application to File Declaration of Intention, Form N-300. $320.
    (3) Request for a Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization 
Proceedings (under section 336 of the Act), Form N-336. $830. There is 
no fee for an applicant who has filed an Application for Naturalization 
under section 328 or 329 of the Act with respect to military service 
and whose application has been denied.
    (4) Application for Naturalization, Form N-400. $760. With the 
following exceptions:
    (i) No fee is charged an applicant who meets the requirements of 
section 328 or 329 of the Act with respect to military service.
    (ii) The fee for an applicant with an approved Request for Reduced 
Fee, Form I-942, whose documented income is less than 200 percent of 
the Federal poverty level: $380.
    (5) Request for Certification of Military or Naval Service, Form N-
476. No fee.
    (6) Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization Purposes, 
Form N-470. $420.
    (7) Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship 
Document, Form N-565. $555. There is no fee when this application is 
submitted under 8 CFR 338.5(a) or 343a.1 to request correction of a 
certificate that contains an error.
    (8) Application for Certificate of Citizenship, Form N-600. $1,385. 
There is no fee for any application filed by a current or former member 
of any branch of the U.S. armed forces on their own behalf.
    (9) Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate Under 
Section 322, Form N-600K. $1,385.
    (10) Application for Posthumous Citizenship, Form N-644. No fee.
    (11) Medical Certification for Disability Exceptions, Form N-648. 
No fee.
    (c) G Forms, statutory fees, and non-form fees--(1) Genealogy Index 
Search Request, Form G-1041. The fee is due regardless of the search 
results.
    (i) When filed online: $100.
    (ii) When filed on paper: $120.
    (2) Genealogy Records Request, Form G-1041A. USCIS will refund the 
records request fee when it is unable to locate any file previously 
identified in response to the index search request.
    (i) When filed online: $240.
    (ii) When filed on paper: $260.
    (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: $235.
    (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; and
    (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 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 
certain petitioners who employ 50 or more employees in the United 
States if more than 50 percent of the petitioner's employees are in H-
1B, L-1A, or L-1B nonimmigrant status: $4,000. Collection of this fee 
is scheduled to end on September 30, 2027.
    (9) 9-11 response and biometric entry-exit fee for L-1 Visa. For 
certain petitioners who employ 50 or more employees in the United 
States, if more than 50 percent of the petitioner's employees are in H-
1B, L-1A, or L-1B nonimmigrant status: $4,500. This fee will be 
collected through September 29, 2027.
    (10) Claimant under section 289 of the Act. No fee.
    (11) Registration requirement for petitioners seeking to file H-1B 
petitions on behalf of cap-subject aliens. For each registration 
submitted to register for the H-1B cap or advanced degree exemption 
selection process: $215. This fee will not be refunded if the 
registration is not selected or is withdrawn.
    (12) Request for Certificate of Non-Existence, G-1566. $330. For a 
certification of non-existence of a naturalization record.
    (13) Asylum Program Fee. $600. The Asylum Program Fee must be paid 
by any petitioner filing a Petition or Application for a Nonimmigrant 
Worker, Form I-129, Petition for a CNMI-Only Nonimmigrant Transitional 
Worker, Form I-129CW, or an Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, Form 
I-140.
    (d) Inflationary adjustment. The fees prescribed in this section 
may be adjusted once per year by publication of a rule in the Federal 
Register based on the amount of inflation as measured by the difference 
in the CPI-U as published by the U.S. Department of Labor, U.S. Bureau 
of Labor Statistics in [MONTH FINAL RULE IS EFFECTIVE] of the year of 
the last fee rule and the year of the adjustment under this section. 
The fee calculated under this paragraph (d) will be rounded to the 
nearest $5 increment.


Sec.  106.3  Fee waivers and exemptions.

    (a) Waiver of fees--(1) Eligibility for a fee waiver. Discretionary 
waiver of the fees provided in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section are 
limited as follows:
    (i) The party requesting the benefit is unable to pay the 
prescribed fee.
    (ii) A waiver based on inability to pay is consistent with the 
status or benefit sought, including benefits that require demonstration 
of the applicant's ability to support himself or herself, or 
individuals who seek immigration status based on a substantial 
financial investment.
    (2) Requesting a fee waiver. A person must submit a request for a 
fee waiver on the form prescribed by USCIS in accordance with the 
instructions on the form.
    (3) USCIS fees that may be waived. Only the following fees may be 
waived:
    (i) The following fees for the following forms may be waived 
without condition:
    (A) Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card (Form I-90);
    (B) Application for Relief Under Former Section 212(c) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (Form I-191);
    (C) Petition to Remove the Conditions of Residence (Form I-751);
    (D) Application for Family Unity Benefits (Form I-817);
    (E) Application for Temporary Protected Status (Form I-821);
    (F) Application for Suspension of Deportation or Special Rule 
Cancellation of Removal (Form I-881)

[[Page 594]]

(pursuant to section 203 of Pub. L. 105-110);
    (G) Application to File Declaration of Intention (Form N-300);
    (H) Request for a Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization 
Proceedings (Form N-336) (under section 336 of the INA);
    (I) Application for Naturalization (Form N-400);
    (J) Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization Purposes 
(N-470);
    (K) Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document 
(N-565);
    (L) Application for Certificate of Citizenship (N-600); and
    (M) Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate under 
section 322 of the Act (N-600K).
    (ii) The following form fees may be waived based on the conditions 
described in paragraphs (a)(3)(ii)(A) through (F) of this section:
    (A) Petition for a CNMI-Only Nonimmigrant Transitional Worker, or 
an Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status (Form I-539), only 
in the case of a noncitizen applying for CW-2 nonimmigrant status;
    (B) Application for Travel Document (Form I-131), when filed to 
request humanitarian parole;
    (C) Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B), when there is no fee 
for the underlying application or petition or that fee may be waived;
    (D) Notice of Appeal of Decision Under Sections 245A or 210 of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (Form I-694), if the underlying 
application or petition was fee exempt, the filing fee was waived, or 
was eligible for a fee waiver;
    (E) Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765), except 
persons filing under category (c)(33), Deferred Action for Childhood 
Arrivals (DACA); and
    (F) Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker (Form I-129) or Application to 
Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status (Form I-539), only in the case of an 
alien applying for E-2 CNMI Investor for an extension of stay.
    (iii) Any fees associated with the filing of any benefit request 
under 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(51) and those otherwise self-petitioning under 8 
U.S.C. 1154(a)(1) (VAWA self-petitioners), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(T) (T 
visas), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(U) (U visas), 8 U.S.C. 1105a (battered 
spouses of A, G, E-3, or H nonimmigrants), 8 U.S.C. 1229(b)(2) (special 
rule cancellation for battered spouse or child), and 8 U.S.C. 1254a(a) 
(Temporary Protected Status).
    (iv) The following fees may be waived only if the person is exempt 
from the public charge grounds of inadmissibility under section 
212(a)(4) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(4):
    (A) Application for Advance Permission to Enter as Nonimmigrant 
(Form I-192);
    (B) Application for Waiver for Passport and/or Visa (Form I-193);
    (C) Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status 
(Form I-485); and
    (D) Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility (Form I-
601).
    (4) Immigration Court fees. The provisions relating to the 
authority of the immigration judges or the Board to waive fees 
prescribed in paragraph (b) of this section in cases under their 
jurisdiction can be found at 8 CFR 1003.8 and 1003.24.
    (5) Fees under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). FOIA fees may 
be waived or reduced if DHS determines that such action would be in the 
public interest because furnishing the information can be considered as 
primarily benefiting the general public.
    (b) Humanitarian fee exemptions. Persons in the following 
categories are exempt from paying certain fees as follows:
    (1) Persons seeking or granted Special Immigrant Juvenile 
classification who file the following forms related to the Special 
Immigrant Juvenile classification or adjustment of status pursuant to 
section 245(h) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1255(h):
    (i) Application for Travel Document (Form I-131).
    (ii) Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B), if filed for any 
benefit request filed before adjustment of status or a motion filed for 
an Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (Form 
I-485).
    (iii) Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status 
(Form I-485).
    (iv) Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility (Form I-
601).
    (v) Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765).
    (2) Persons seeking or granted T nonimmigrant status who file the 
following forms related to the T nonimmigrant classification or 
adjustment of status pursuant to INA section 245(l), 8 U.S.C. 1255(l):
    (i) Application for Travel Document (Form I-131).
    (ii) Application for Advance Permission to Enter as a Nonimmigrant 
(Form I-192).
    (iii) Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa (Form I-193).
    (iv) Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B), if filed for any 
benefit request filed before adjustment of status or a motion or appeal 
filed for an Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust 
Status (Form I-485) if applicable.
    (v) Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status 
(Form I-485).
    (vi) Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status (Form I-539).
    (vii) Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility (Form I-
601).
    (viii) Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765).
    (3) Persons seeking or granted special immigrant visa or status as 
Afghan or Iraqi translators or interpreters, Iraqi nationals employed 
by or on behalf of the U.S. Government, or Afghan nationals employed by 
or on behalf of the U.S. Government or employed by the ISAF and their 
derivative beneficiaries, who file the following forms related to the 
Special Immigrant classification or adjustment of status pursuant to 
such classification:
    (i) Application for Travel Document (Form I-131).
    (ii) Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission into the 
U.S. After Deportation or Removal (Form I-212).
    (iii) Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B), if filed for any 
benefit request filed before adjustment of status or a motion filed for 
an Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (Form 
I-485).
    (iv) Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status 
(Form I-485).
    (v) Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility (Form I-
601).
    (vi) Application for initial Employment Authorization (Form I-765).
    (4) Persons seeking or granted adjustment of status as abused 
spouses and children under the Cuban Adjustment Act (CAA) and the 
Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act (HRIFA) are exempt from paying 
the following fees for forms related to those benefits:
    (i) Application for Travel Document (Form I-131).
    (ii) Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission into the 
U.S. After Deportation or Removal (Form I-212).
    (iii) Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B), if filed for any 
benefit request filed before adjustment of status or a motion filed for 
an Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (Form 
I-485).
    (iv) Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status 
(Form I-485).
    (v) Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility (Form I-
601).

[[Page 595]]

    (vi) Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765).
    (5) Persons seeking U nonimmigrant status who file the following 
forms related to the U nonimmigrant status are exempt from paying fees 
if filed before the petitioner files an Application to Register 
Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (Form I-485):
    (i) Application for Advance Permission to Enter as a Nonimmigrant 
(Form I-192).
    (ii) Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa (Form I-193).
    (iii) Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B).
    (iv) Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status (Form I-539).
    (v) Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765) for their 
initial request for principals and derivatives submitted under 8 CFR 
274a.12(a)(19) and (20) and (c)(14).
    (6) Person seeking or granted immigrant classification as VAWA 
self-petitioners and derivatives as defined in section 101(a)(51)(A) 
and (B) of the Act or those otherwise self-petitioning for immigrant 
classification under section 204(a)(1) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1154(a)(1), 
are exempt from paying the following fees for forms related to the 
benefit:
    (i) When the Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special 
Immigrant (Form I-360) and Application to Register Permanent Residence 
or Adjust Status (Form I-485) are concurrently filed or pending:
    (A) Application for Travel Document (Form I-131).
    (B) Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission into the 
U.S. After Deportation or Removal (Form I-212).
    (C) Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) if filed for any 
benefit request filed before adjustment of status or a motion filed for 
an Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (Form 
I-485).
    (D) Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility (Form I-
601).
    (E) Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765) for 
initial requests submitted under 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(9) and (14) and 
section 204(a)(1)(K) of the Act.
    (ii) When the Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special 
Immigrant (Form I-360) is filed as a standalone self-petition:
    (A) Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) for a motion or appeal 
of a Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant (Form I-
360).
    (B) Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765) for 
initial requests submitted under 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(14) and section 
204(a)(1)(K) of the Act, 8 U.S.C 1154(a)(1)(K).
    (7) Abused spouses and children applying for benefits under the 
Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) are 
exempt from paying the following fees for forms related to the benefit:
    (i) Application for Suspension of Deportation or Special Rule 
Cancellation of Removal (Pursuant to Section 203 of Public Law 105-100 
(NACARA)) (Form I-881).
    (ii) Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility (Form I-
601).
    (iii) Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765) 
submitted under 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(10).
    (8) Battered spouses and children of a lawful permanent resident 
(LPR) or U.S. citizen applying for cancellation of removal and 
adjustment of status under section 240A(b)(2) of the Act are exempt 
from paying the following fees for forms related to the benefit:
    (i) Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility (Form I-
601).
    (ii) Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765) for 
their initial request under 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(10).
    (9) Refugees, persons paroled as refugees, or lawful permanent 
residents who obtained such status as refugees in the United States are 
exempt from paying the following fees:
    (i) Application for Travel Document (Form I-131).
    (ii) Application for Carrier Documentation (Form I-131A).
    (iii) Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765).
    (iv) Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status 
(Form I-485).
    (c) Director's waiver or exemption exception. The Director of USCIS 
may authorize the waiver of or exemption from, in whole or in part, a 
form fee required by Sec.  106.2 that is not otherwise waivable under 
this section, if the Director determines that such action is in the 
public interest and consistent with the applicable law. This 
discretionary authority may be delegated only to the USCIS Deputy 
Director.


Sec.  106.4   Premium processing service.

    (a) General. A person may submit a request to USCIS for premium 
processing of certain immigration benefit requests, subject to 
processing timeframes and fees, as described in this section.
    (b) Submitting a request. A request must be submitted on the form 
and in the manner prescribed by USCIS in the form instructions. If the 
request for premium processing is submitted together with the 
underlying immigration benefit request, all required fees in the 
correct amount must be paid. The fee to request premium processing 
service may not be waived and must be paid in addition to other filing 
fees. USCIS may require the premium processing service fee be paid in a 
separate remittance from other filing fees and preclude combined 
payments in the applicable form instructions.
    (c) Designated benefit requests and fee amounts. Benefit requests 
designated for premium processing and the corresponding fees to request 
premium processing service are as follows:
    (1) Application for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(E)(i), (ii), or (iii) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 
1101(a)(15)(E)(i), (ii), or (iii): $2,500.
    (2) Petition for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 
or section 222(a) of the Immigration Act of 1990, Public Law 101-649: 
$2,500.
    (3) Petition for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 
1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b): $1,500.
    (4) Petition for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(H)(iii) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(iii): 
$2,500.
    (5) Petition for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(L) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15(L): $2,500.
    (6) Petition for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(O)(i) or (ii) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 
1101(a)(15)(O)(i): $2,500.
    (7) Petition for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(P)(i), (ii), or (iii) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 
1101(a)(15)(P)(i): $2,500.
    (8) Petition for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(Q) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(Q): $2,500.
    (9) Petition for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(R) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(R): $1,500.
    (10) Application for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 214(e) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1184(e): $2,500.
    (11) Petition for classification under section 203(b)(1)(A) of the 
INA, 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(1)(A): $2,500.
    (12) Petition for classification under section 203(b)(1)(B) of the 
INA, 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(1)(B): $2,500.
    (13) Petition for classification under section 203(b)(2)(A) of the 
INA, 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(2)(A) not involving a waiver under section 
203(b)(2)(B) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(2)(B): $2,500.

[[Page 596]]

    (14) Petition for classification under section 203(b)(3)(A)(i) of 
the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(3)(A)(i): $2,500.
    (15) Petition for classification under section 203(b)(3)(A)(ii) of 
the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(3)(A)(ii): $2,500.
    (16) Petition for classification under section 203(b)(3)(A)(iii) of 
the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(3)(A)(iii): $2,500.
    (17) Petition for classification under section 203(b)(1)(C) of the 
INA, 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(1)(C): $2,500.
    (18) Petition for classification under section 203(b)(2) of the 
INA, 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(2), involving a waiver under section 203(b)(2)(B) 
of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(2)(B): $2,500.
    (19) Application under section 248 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1258, to 
change status to a classification described in section 101(a)(15)(F), 
(J), or (M) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F), (J), or (M): $1,750.
    (20) Application under section 248 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1258, to 
change status to be classified as a dependent of a nonimmigrant 
described in section 101(a)(15)(E), (H), (L), (O), (P), or (R) of the 
INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(E), (H), (L), (O), (P), or (M), or to extend 
stay in such classification: $1,750.
    (21) Application for employment authorization: $1,500.
    (d) Fee adjustments. The fee to request premium processing service 
may be adjusted by notification in the Federal Register on a biennial 
basis based on the percentage by which the Consumer Price Index for All 
Urban Consumers for the month of June preceding the date on which such 
adjustment takes effect exceeds the Consumer Price Index for All Urban 
Consumers for the same month of the second preceding calendar year.
    (e) Processing timeframes. The processing timeframes for a request 
for premium processing are as follows:
    (1) Application for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(E)(i), (ii), or (iii) of the INA: 15 business days.
    (2) Petition for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the INA or section 222(a) of the 
Immigration Act of 1990, Public Law 101-649: 15 business days.
    (3) Petition for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b) of the INA: 15 business days.
    (4) Petition for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(H)(iii) of the INA: 15 business days.
    (5) Petition for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(L) of the INA: 15 business days.
    (6) Petition for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(O)(i) or (ii) of the INA: 15 business days.
    (7) Petition for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(P)(i), (ii), or (iii) of the INA: 15 business days.
    (8) Petition for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(Q) of the INA: 15 business days.
    (9) Petition for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 101(a)(15)(R) of the INA: 15 business days.
    (10) Application for classification of a nonimmigrant described in 
section 214(e) of the INA: 15 business days.
    (11) Petition for classification under section 203(b)(1)(A) of the 
INA: 15 business days.
    (12) Petition for classification under section 203(b)(1)(B) of the 
INA: 15 business days.
    (13) Petition for classification under section 203(b)(2)(A) of the 
INA not involving a waiver under section 203(b)(2)(B) of the INA: 15 
business days.
    (14) Petition for classification under section 203(b)(3)(A)(i) of 
the INA: 15 business days.
    (15) Petition for classification under section 203(b)(3)(A)(ii) of 
the INA: 15 business days.
    (16) Petition for classification under section 203(b)(3)(A)(iii) of 
the INA: 15 business days.
    (17) Petition for classification under section 203(b)(1)(C) of the 
INA: 45 business days.
    (18) Petition for classification under section 203(b)(2) of the INA 
involving a waiver under section 203(b)(2)(B) of the INA: 45 business 
days.
    (19) Application under section 248 of the INA to change status to a 
classification described in section 101(a)(15)(F), (J), or (M) of the 
INA: 30 business days.
    (20) Application under section 248 of the INA to change status to 
be classified as a dependent of a nonimmigrant described in section 
101(a)(15)(E), (H), (L), (O), (P), or (R) of the INA, or to extend stay 
in such classification: 30 business days.
    (21) Application for employment authorization: 30 business days.
    (22) For the purpose of this section a business day is a day that 
the Federal Government is open for business, and does not include 
weekends, federally observed holidays, or 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.
    (f) Processing requirements and refunds. (1) USCIS will issue an 
approval notice, denial notice, a notice of intent to deny, or a 
request for evidence within the premium processing timeframe.
    (2) Premium processing timeframes will commence:
    (i) For those benefits described in paragraphs (e)(1) through (16) 
of this section, on the date the form prescribed by USCIS, together 
with the required fee(s), are received by USCIS.
    (ii) For those benefits described in paragraphs (e)(17) through 
(21) of this section, on the date that all prerequisites for 
adjudication, the form prescribed by USCIS, and fee(s) are received by 
USCIS.
    (3) In the event USCIS issues a notice of intent to deny or a 
request for evidence, the premium processing timeframe will stop and 
will recommence with a new timeframe as specified in paragraphs (e)(1) 
through (21) of this section on the date that USCIS receives a response 
to the notice of intent to deny or the request for evidence.
    (4) Except as provided in paragraph (f)(5) of this section, USCIS 
will refund the premium processing service fee but continue to process 
the case if USCIS does not take adjudicative action described in 
paragraph (f)(1) of this section within the applicable processing 
timeframe as required in paragraph (e) of this section.
    (5) USCIS may retain the premium processing fee and not take an 
adjudicative action described in paragraph (f)(1) of this section on 
the request within the applicable processing timeframe, and not notify 
the person who filed the request, if USCIS opens an investigation for 
fraud or misrepresentation relating to the immigration benefit request.
    (g) Availability. (1) USCIS will announce by its official internet 
website, currently https://www.uscis.gov, the benefit requests 
described in paragraph (c) of this section for which premium processing 
may be requested, the dates upon which such availability commences or 
ends, or any conditions that may apply.
    (2) USCIS may suspend the availability of premium processing for 
immigration benefit requests designated for premium processing if 
circumstances prevent the completion of processing of a significant 
number of such requests within the applicable processing timeframe.

[[Page 597]]

Sec.  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.


Sec.  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

0
7. The authority citation for part 204 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1151, 1153, 1154, 1182, 1184, 
1186a, 1255, 1324a, 1641; 8 CFR part 2.

0
8. Section 204.3 is amended by:
0
a. Revising and republishing the definitions of ``Advanced processing 
application'' and ``Orphan petition'' in paragraph (b);
0
b. Revising and republishing paragraph (d) introductory text; and
0
c. Revising paragraphs (h)(3), (7), (13), and (14).
    The revisions and republications read as follows:


Sec.  204.3   Orphan cases under section 101(b)(1)(F) of the Act (non-
Hague Adoption Convention cases).

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    Advanced processing application means Form I-600A (Application for 
Advanced Processing of Orphan Petition) completed in accordance with 
the form's instructions and submitted with the required supporting 
documentation and the fee as required in 8 CFR 106.2. The application 
must be signed in accordance with the form's instructions by the 
married petitioner and spouse, or by the unmarried petitioner.
* * * * *
    Orphan petition means Form I-600 (Petition to Classify Orphan as an 
Immediate Relative). 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. The petition must be signed in accordance with the form's 
instructions by the married petitioner and spouse, or the unmarried 
petitioner.
* * * * *
    (d) Supporting documentation for a petition for an identified 
orphan. Any document not in the English language must be accompanied by 
a certified English translation. If an orphan has been identified for 
adoption and the advanced processing application is pending, the 
prospective adoptive parents may file the orphan petition at the USCIS 
office where the application is pending. The prospective adoptive 
parents who have an approved advanced processing application must file 
an orphan petition and all supporting documents within 15 months of the 
date of the approval of the advanced processing application. 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. Prospective 
adoptive parents who do not have an advanced processing application 
approved or pending may file the application and petition concurrently 
on one Form I-600 if they have identified an orphan for adoption. An 
orphan petition must be accompanied by full documentation as follows:
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (3) Advanced processing application approved. If the advanced 
processing application is approved:
    (i) The prospective adoptive parents will be advised in writing. A 
notice of approval expires 15 months after the date on which USCIS 
received the Federal Bureau of Investigation (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.
    (ii) USCIS may extend the validity period for the approval of a 
Form I-600A if requested in accordance with 8 CFR 106.2(a)(31). An 
applicant may not file a Form I-600A Supplement 3 seeking extension of 
an approval notice more than 90 days before the expiration of the 
validity period for the Form I-600A approval but must do so on or 
before the date on which the validity period expires if the applicant 
seeks an extension.
    (iii) 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.
    (iv) It does not guarantee that the orphan petition will be 
approved.
* * * * *
    (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:
    (i) The application will be deemed abandoned;
    (ii) 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 biometric checks;
    (iii) The director will dispose of documentation relating to 
biometrics checks in accordance with current policy; and
    (iv) 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.
    (14) Revocation. (i) The approval of an advanced processing 
application or an orphan petition shall be automatically revoked in 
accordance with 8 CFR 205.1 if an applicable reason exists. The 
approval of an advanced processing application or an orphan petition 
shall be revoked if the director becomes aware of information that 
would have resulted in denial had it been known at the time of 
adjudication. Such a revocation or any other revocation on notice shall 
be made in accordance with 8 CFR 205.2.
    (ii) The approval of a Form I-600A or Form I-600 combination filing 
is automatically revoked if before the final decision on a 
beneficiary's application for admission with an immigrant visa or for 
adjustment of status:
    (A) The marriage of the applicant terminates; or
    (B) An unmarried applicant marries.
    (iii) Revocation is without prejudice to the filing of a new Form 
I-600A or Form I-600 combination filing, with fee, accompanied by a new 
or updated home study, reflecting the change in marital status. If a 
Form I-600 had already been

[[Page 598]]

filed based on the approval of the prior Form I-600A, a new Form I-600 
must also be filed with the new Form I-600A under this paragraph 
(h)(14). The new Form I-600 will be adjudicated only if the new Form I-
600A is approved.
* * * * *
0
9. Section 204.5 is amended by republishing paragraphs (p)(4) heading 
and (p)(4)(i) to read as follows:


Sec.  204.5   Petitions for employment-based immigrants.

* * * * *
    (p) * * *
    (4) Application for employment authorization. (i) To request 
employment authorization, an eligible applicant described in paragraph 
(p)(1), (2), or (3) of this section must:
    (A) File an application for employment authorization (Form I-765), 
with USCIS, in accordance with 8 CFR 274a.13(a) and the form 
instructions.
    (B) Submit biometric information as may be provided in the 
applicable form instructions.
* * * * *
0
10. Section 204.312 is amended by revising and republishing paragraph 
(e)(3)(i) and paragraph (e)(3)(ii) introductory text to read as 
follows:


Sec.  204.312   Adjudication of the Form I-800A.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (3)(i) If the 15-month validity period for a Form I-800A approval 
is about to expire, the applicant:
    (A) May file Form I-800A Supplement 3 as described in 8 CFR 
106.2(a)(31) to request an extension.
    (B) 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 if the applicant seeks an 
extension.
    (ii) Any Form I-800A Supplement 3 that is filed to obtain an 
extension or update of the approval of a Form I-800A or to change of 
Hague Convention countries must be accompanied by:
* * * * *
0
11. Section 204.313 is amended by revising and republishing paragraph 
(a) to read as follows:


Sec.  204.313   Filing and adjudication of a Form I-800.

    (a) When to file. Once a Form I-800A has been approved and the 
Central Authority has proposed placing a child for adoption by the 
petitioner, the petitioner may file the Form I-800. The petitioner must 
complete the Form I-800 in accordance with the instructions that 
accompany the Form I-800 and sign the Form I-800 personally. In the 
case of a married petitioner, one spouse cannot sign for the other, 
even under a power of attorney or similar agency arrangement. The 
petitioner may then file the Form I-800 with the stateside or overseas 
USCIS office or the visa issuing post that has jurisdiction under Sec.  
204.308(b) to adjudicate the Form I-800, together with the evidence 
specified in this section and the filing fee specified in 8 CFR 106.2, 
if more than one Form I-800 is filed for children who are not birth 
siblings.
* * * * *

PART 212--DOCUMENTARY REQUIREMENTS: NONIMMIGRANTS; WAIVERS; 
ADMISSION OF CERTAIN INADMISSIBLE ALIENS; PAROLE

0
12. The authority citation for part 212 is revised 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 (sec. 7209, Pub. L. 
108-458, 118 Stat. 3638), 1187, 1223, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1255, 1359; 
8 CFR part 2. Section 212.1(q) also issued under sec. 702, Pub. L. 
110-229, 122 Stat. 754, 854.

0
13. Section 212.19 is amended by revising and republishing paragraphs 
(b)(1), (c)(1), (e), (h)(1), and (j) to read as follows:


Sec.  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 start-up 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 an application for entrepreneur parole with USCIS on the 
form prescribed by 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 will be required to submit 
biometric information. An alien seeking 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 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 they 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

0
14. 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, 1357, and 1372; sec. 
643, Pub. L. 104-208, 110 Stat. 3009-708; Pub. L. 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; Pub. L. 115-
218, 132 Stat. 1547 (48 U.S.C. 1806).

0
15. Section 214.1 is amended by republishing paragraph (c)(5) to read 
as follows:


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

* * * * *

[[Page 599]]

    (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 USCIS. The 
denial of an application for extension of stay may not be appealed.
* * * * *
0
16. Section 214.2 is amended by:
0
a. Revising and republishing paragraphs (e)(8)(iii) through (v), 
(e)(23)(viii), (h)(2)(i)(A), (h)(2)(ii), (h)(5)(i)(B), and (h)(19)(i) 
introductory text;
0
b. Revising paragraph (m)(14)(ii) introductory text;
0
c. Revising and republishing paragraphs (o)(2)(iv)(F), (p)(2)(iv)(F), 
and (q)(5)(ii);
0
d. Republishing the definition for ``Petition'' in paragraph (r)(3);
0
e. Revising paragraph (r)(5);
0
f. Republishing paragraph (w)(5) and (w)(15)(iii); and
0
g. Revising paragraph (w)(16).

    The revisions and republications read as follows:


Sec.  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 that would 
affect the alien's eligibility for E classification. Further, prior 
approval is not required if corporate changes occur which do not affect 
the previously approved employment relationship, or are otherwise non-
substantive. To facilitate admission, the alien may:
    (A) Present a letter from the treaty-qualifying company through 
which the alien attained E classification explaining the nature of the 
change;
    (B) Request a new approval notice reflecting the non-substantive 
change by filing an application with a description of the change; or
    (C) Apply directly to Department of State for a new E visa 
reflecting the change. An alien who does not elect one of the three 
options contained in paragraphs (e)(8)(iv)(A) through (C) of this 
section, is not precluded from demonstrating to the satisfaction of the 
immigration officer at the port-of-entry in some other manner, his or 
her admissibility under section 101(a)(15)(E) of the Act.
    (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 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) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (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. An 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 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

[[Page 600]]

beneficiaries performing in the same location and in the same 
occupation. Up to 25 named beneficiaries may be included per petition.
* * * * *
    (q) * * *
    (5) * * *
    (ii) Petition for multiple participants. The petitioner may include 
up to 25 named participants on a petition. The petitioner shall include 
the name, date of birth, nationality, and other identifying information 
required on the petition for each participant. The petitioner must also 
indicate the United States consulate at which each participant will 
apply for a Q-1 visa. For participants who are visa-exempt under 8 CFR 
212.1(a), the petitioner must indicate the port of entry at which each 
participant will apply for admission to the United States.
* * * * *
    (r) * * *
    (3) * * *
    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 5 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 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.
* * * * *
    (15) * * *
    (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.
    (16) 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.
* * * * *
0
17. Section 214.14 is amended by revising and republishing paragraph 
(c)(1) introductory text to read as follows:


Sec.  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 a Petition for U Nonimmigrant Status on the form 
prescribed by USCIS, and initial evidence to USCIS in accordance with 
this paragraph (c)(1) and the form instructions. A petitioner who 
received interim relief is not required to submit initial evidence with 
a Petition for U Nonimmigrant Status if he or she wishes to rely on the 
law enforcement certification and other evidence that was submitted 
with the request for interim relief.
* * * * *

PART 240--VOLUNTARY DEPARTURE, SUSPENSION OF DEPORTATION AND 
SPECIAL RULE CANCELLATION OF REMOVAL

0
18. The authority citation for part 240 continues to read as follows:

    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.

0
19. Section 240.63 is amended by revising and republishing paragraph 
(a) to read as follows:


Sec.  240.63  Application process.

    (a) Form and fees. Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this 
section, the 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, Application for 
Suspension of Deportation, before the effective date of the form 
prescribed by USCIS may apply with USCIS by submitting the completed 
Application for Suspension of Deportation 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

0
20. The authority citation for part 244 continues to read as follows:

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

0
21. Section 244.6 is revised and republished to read as follows:


Sec.  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 re-registration and, except as otherwise provided in 
this section, with the appropriate fees as described in 8 CFR part 106.
    (b) An applicant for TPS may also request an employment 
authorization document pursuant to 8 CFR part 274a by filing an 
Application for Employment Authorization in accordance with the form 
instructions and in accordance with 8 CFR 106.2 and 106.3.
0
22. Section 244.17 is amended by republishing paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  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. Re-registration 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

[[Page 601]]

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

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

0
23. The authority citation for part 245 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1252, 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.

0
24. Section 245.1 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (f); and
0
b. Removing the parenthetical authority citation at the end of the 
section.

    The revision reads as follows:


Sec.  245.1  Eligibility.

* * * * *
    (f) Concurrent applications to overcome grounds of inadmissibility. 
Except as provided in 8 CFR parts 235 and 249, an application under 
this part shall be the sole method of requesting the exercise of 
discretion under sections 212(g), (h), (i), and (k) of the Act, as they 
relate to the inadmissibility of an alien in the United States.
* * * * *

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

0
25. The authority citation for part 245a continues to read as follows:

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

0
26. Section 245a.2 is amended by republishing paragraph (e)(3) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  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.
* * * * *
0
27. Section 245a.3 is amended by republishing paragraph (d)(3) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  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.
* * * * *
0
28. Section 245a.4 is amended by republishing paragraph (b)(5)(iii) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  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.
* * * * *
0
29. Section 245a.12 is amended by republishing paragraph (d) 
introductory text to read as follows:


Sec.  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.
* * * * *

PART 264--REGISTRATION AND FINGERPRINTING OF ALIENS IN THE UNITED 
STATES

0
30. The authority citation for part 264 continues to read as follows:

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

0
31. Section 264.5 is amended by revising and republishing paragraph (a) 
to read as follows:


Sec.  264.5  Application for a replacement Permanent Resident Card.

    (a) Filing instructions. A request to replace a Permanent Resident 
Card must be filed in accordance with the appropriate form instructions 
and with the fee specified in 8 CFR 106.2.
* * * * *

PART 274a--CONTROL OF EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS

0
32. The authority citation for part 274a is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1324a; 48 U.S.C. 1806; Pub. L. 
101-410, 104 Stat. 890 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note); Pub. L. 114-74, 129 
Stat. 599 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note); 8 CFR part 2.

0
33. Section 274a.12 is amended by revising and republishing paragraphs 
(b)(9), (13), and (14) to read as follows:


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

* * * * *
    (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 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

[[Page 602]]

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.
* * * * *

Alejandro N. Mayorkas,
Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2022-27066 Filed 1-3-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-97-P