[The Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions]
[Department of Justice Regulatory Plan]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 231 / Friday, November 29, 1996 / The
                            Regulatory Plan

[[Page 62077]]

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (DOJ)
Statement of Regulatory Priorities
The Department of Justice is not a major regulatory agency, and it 
carries out its vital investigative, prosecutorial, and other law 
enforcement activities principally through means other than the 
regulatory process. Even so, the Department does have significant 
responsibilities for implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act 
(ADA) as well as the immigration laws, including the Immigration Reform 
and Control Act of 1986 and the Immigration Act of 1990. The 
Department's key regulatory goals and initiatives are set forth in 
detail below.
The Department has worked actively to implement the general regulatory 
principles of Executive Order 12866. Relatively few of the Department's 
rules are significant regulatory actions requiring review by the Office 
of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Executive Order. Accordingly, 
the orientation of the OMB review process to focus on significant rules 
has required the Department to increase its own efforts to ensure that 
all of its regulations are carefully reviewed for consistency with the 
Administration's regulatory principles, including the large majority of 
rules that are not reviewed directly by OMB as significant regulatory 
actions.
Pursuant to section 4(c) of Executive Order 12866, the Department of 
Justice provides the following statement of regulatory priorities, 
focusing in particular on five regulatory initiatives in the areas of 
civil rights and immigration.
In addition to the specific initiatives set forth below, several other 
components of the Department carry out important responsibilities 
through the regulatory process. Although their regulatory efforts are 
not singled out for specific attention in this Regulatory Plan, those 
components carry out key roles in implementing the Department's law 
enforcement priorities. In particular, the Drug Enforcement 
Administration (DEA) is responsible for controlling abuse of narcotics 
and dangerous drugs by restricting the aggregate supply of those drugs. 
DEA accomplishes its objectives through coordination with State, local, 
and other Federal officials in drug enforcement activities, development 
and maintenance of drug intelligence systems, regulation of legitimate 
controlled substances and enforcement coordination and intelligence-
gathering activities with foreign government agencies. DEA has various 
regulatory actions under development relating to the drug control 
requirements and to streamlining initiatives undertaken pursuant to the 
Administration's Regulatory Reinvention initiative.
Also, the Federal Bureau of Investigation will be promulgating 
regulations under the Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act 
of 1994 (CALEA). Congress enacted CALEA to address the recent and 
continuing advances in telecommunications technology which have 
impaired and, in some instances precluded, law enforcement agencies 
from fully conducting various types of court-authorized electronic 
surveillance. The Attorney General is authorized to reimburse carriers 
for all of the reasonable costs directly associated with the 
modifications they perform on equipment, facilities, and services 
deployed on or before January 1, 1995. These regulations will provide 
the cost accounting standards for reimbursements.
Civil Rights
The Department and its Civil Rights Division are deeply committed to a 
rigorous and revitalized approach to the enforcement of this Nation's 
civil rights laws. In keeping with that commitment, the Division will 
be reviewing, updating, and improving its civil rights regulations, 
which are the Division's basic enforcement tools. As a priority for the 
coming year, the Division is completing the initial ADA rulemaking 
cycle by amending its regulations under the ADA to incorporate revised 
standards applicable to new buildings and facilities used by State and 
local governments. The Department's Regulatory Plan has one civil 
rights initiative.
The Department is planning to make revisions in its regulations 
implementing title II of ADA (and conforming changes to title III) in 
order to incorporate the revised accessibility design guidelines 
developed by the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance 
Board (the Access Board). Subtitle A of title II of the ADA protects 
qualified individuals with disabilities from discrimination on the 
basis of disability in the services, programs, or activities of all 
State and local governments. Title III of the ADA protects qualified 
individuals with disabilities from discrimination on the basis of 
disability by public accommodations and in commercial facilities. The 
Access Board's new guidelines for State and local buildings and 
facilities are the subject of a related, pending rulemaking proceeding, 
and have been subject to considerable scrutiny through the Board's 
regulatory process. The Department of Justice, which is required by 
statute to promulgate regulations that do not go below the Access 
Board's minimum guidelines, has proposed to incorporate them into the 
Department's title II rule.
These amendments to the ADA regulations are an important step forward 
in fulfilling the promise of the ADA in ushering in a new era of 
opportunity and dignity for the many millions of Americans with 
disabilities. These regulations, which will apply to new construction 
and to alterations of State and local buildings and facilities, will 
open doors that have shut out people with disabilities in the past.
Immigration
The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) is responsible for 
facilitating the entry of persons legally admissible as visitors or as 
immigrants to the United States, for preventing unlawful entry or 
receipt of immigration benefits by those who are not entitled to 
receive them, and for apprehending or removing those aliens who enter 
or remain illegally in the United States. Though many of the 
Administration's goals for more effective immigration process require 
either new statutory authority or increased resources, the regulatory 
process is a vital aspect of carrying out the goals of the immigration 
laws.
Certainly, one of the regulatory challenges facing the Department of 
Justice is to improve the effectiveness of those regulatory efforts. 
Commissioner Meissner established three fundamental goals at the time 
of her confirmation: to increase the professionalism of the Service, to 
provide immigration control with compassion, and to build the Service's 
role in immigration policy leadership and communication. The regulatory 
priorities for the Service follow those priorities, though other 
desired improvements may require legislative action. Four INS 
initiatives are included in this regulatory plan.
In order to better serve increased numbers of naturalization applicants 
and ensure the integrity of the naturalization process, two specific 
initiatives are being included in this regulatory plan. First, INS will 
revise and strengthen the current system for approving testing entities 
to administer standardized tests of U.S. history and government and 
written English for persons applying to become naturalized

[[Page 62078]]

citizens. Strengthening this system will result in improved service for 
applicants and in more efficient use of INS resources. In addition, INS 
is exploring options for increasing the availability of high-quality, 
low cost assistance to applicants for naturalization and other 
immigration benefits, including recognizing qualifying community-based 
organizations to provide assistance to applicants on a fee-for-service 
basis. Such services would be available not only for naturalization 
applicants, but also for other applicants for other types of 
immigration benefits.
Another major program area to be addressed in this regulatory plan is 
the Service's ongoing effort to facilitate the U.S. business 
community's ability to comply with the Employer Sanctions provisions of 
the Immigration Control and Reform Act. Over the past year the Service 
has published a supplemental proposed rule which not only further 
reduced the number of acceptable documents for verifying employment 
eligibility, but also proposed the addition, based on public comments, 
of an employee attestation provision. Additionally, the Service will be 
promulgating regulations which will propose to eliminate references to 
several types of employment authorization documents (EADs) and to phase 
in replacement of these documents by a new, more secure, EAD.
_______________________________________________________________________
DOJ--Civil Rights Division (CRT)

                              -----------

                            FINAL RULE STAGE

                              -----------

50. NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN STATE AND LOCAL 
GOVERNMENT SERVICES; PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS AND COMMERCIAL FACILITIES; 
ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS
Priority:


Other Significant


Legal Authority:


 42 USC 12134; 42 USC 12186; 5 USC 301; 28 USC 509; 28 USC 510; PL 101-
336


CFR Citation:


 28 CFR 35; 28 CFR 36; 28 CFR 37; 28 CFR 38


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


On July 26, 1991, the Department published its final rules implementing 
titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which 
prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by public entities 
(title II) and in places of public accommodation and commercial 
facilities (title III). Those regulations included accessibility 
guidelines required for facilities covered by title III -- The ADA 
Standards for Accessible Design (ADA Standards) -- but did not 
specifically include guidelines for facilities covered by title II, 
such as courthouses or prisons. Title II entities now have the option 
of using the ADA Standards (without certain exceptions applicable only 
to title III facilities) or another existing standard, the Uniform 
Federal Accessibility Standards.
The final rule will amend titles II and III to adopt a revised version 
of the ADA Standards, which incorporates new guidelines for facilities 
typically covered by title II. The new guidelines were issued as the 
interim final ADA Accessibility Guidelines by the Access Board and were 
published on the same day as the Department's proposed rule.


Statement of Need:


Section 504 of the ADA requires the Access Board to issue supplemental 
minimum guidelines and requirements for accessible design of buildings 
and facilities subject to the ADA, including titles II and III. 
Sections 204(c) and 306(c) of the ADA provide that the Attorney General 
shall promulgate regulations implementing titles II and III that are 
consistent with the Access Board's ADA guidelines. Because the 
Department of Justice is required by statute to promulgate regulations 
that do not go below the Access Board's minimum guidelines, and because 
this rule will adopt standards that are consistent with the guidelines 
issued by the Access Board, as also required by statute, this rule is 
required by statute.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


The summary of the legal basis of authority for this regulation is set 
forth above in the Legal Authority and in Statement of Need.


Alternatives:


The Department is required by the ADA to issue this regulation as 
described in the Statement of Need above. All comments (including those 
that suggest alternatives to the current proposed guidelines) received 
by the Department on the proposed rule and by the Access Board on its 
current interim rule and its guidelines published December 21, 1992, 
have been thoroughly analyzed and considered by the Department. The 
Department anticipates publishing a supplemental notice of proposed 
rulemaking to clarify certain issues prior to the publication of the 
final rule.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


The Clinton Administration is deeply committed to ensuring that the 
goals of the ADA are met. Promulgating this amendment to the 
Department's ADA regulations will ensure that entities subject to the 
ADA will have one comprehensive regulation to follow. Currently, 
entities subject to title II of the ADA (State and local governments) 
have a choice between following the Department's ADA standards for 
title III, which were adopted for places of public accommodation and 
commercial facilities and which do not contain standards for common 
State and local government buildings (such as courthouses and prisons), 
or the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS). By developing 
one comprehensive standard, the Department will eliminate the confusion 
that arises when governments try to mesh two different standards. As a 
result, the overarching goal of improving access to the built 
environment to persons with disabilities will be better served.
The Access Board has analyzed the impact of applying its proposed 
amendments to ADAAG to entities covered by titles II and III of the ADA 
and has determined that they are a significant regulatory action for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866. The Access Board has prepared a 
Regulatory Assessment, which includes a cost impact analysis for 
certain accessibility elements and a discussion of the regulatory 
alternatives considered.
The Access Board has determined that this proposed rule will have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
and, therefore, has included the flexibility analysis required by the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act in its regulatory assessment. The Access 
Board has made every effort to lessen the economic impacts of its 
proposed rule on small entities, but recognizes that such impacts are 
the necessary result of the mandate of the ADA itself. The Access 
Board's analysis also applies to the Department's proposed

[[Page 62079]]

adoption of the revised ADAAG. The Department's proposed procedural 
amendments will not have a significant economic impact on small 
entities.
The Access Board has made every effort to lessen the impact of its 
proposed guidelines on State and local governments, but recognizes that 
the guidelines will have some federalism impacts. These impacts are 
discussed in the Access Board's Regulatory Assessment, which also 
applies to the Department's proposed rule.


Risks:


Without this amendment to the Department's ADA regulations, regulated 
entities will be subject to confusion and delay as they attempt to sort 
out the requirements of conflicting design standards. This amendment 
should eliminate the costs and risks associated with that process.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM            59 FR 31808                                    06/20/94
NPRM Comment Period End                                        08/19/94
Final Action                                                   09/00/97
Small Entities Affected:


Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions


Government Levels Affected:


State, Local


Agency Contact:
John Wodatch
Chief, Disability Rights Section
Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
P.O. Box 66738
Washington, DC 20035-6738
Phone: 800 514-0301
TDD: 800 514-0383
Fax: 202 307-1198
RIN: 1190-AA26
_______________________________________________________________________
DOJ--Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)

                              -----------

                          PROPOSED RULE STAGE

                              -----------

51. STANDARDIZED TESTING FOR NATURALIZATION; PROCEDURES FOR APPROVAL OF 
TEST PROVIDERS
Priority:


Other Significant


Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 8 USC 1103; 8 USC 1423; 8 USC 1443; 8 USC 1447; 8 USC 1448


CFR Citation:


 8 CFR 312


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) is amending part 312 
in its entirety to address recent changes to the testing requirements 
under the Immigration and Nationality Technical Corrections Act of 1994 
(P.L. 103-416) and to revise and strengthen the current system for 
approving testing entities to administer standardized tests of U.S. 
history and government and written English for persons applying to 
become naturalized citizens of the United States. Concurrent efforts 
are also underway to develop new standardized examinations and 
comprehensive study materials for applicants.


Statement of Need:


Over the past two fiscal years, the number of naturalization 
applications filed with the INS has more than doubled from previous 
levels; in fiscal year 1996, the total number of naturalization 
applications filed will exceed 1.1 million. In 1991, INS instituted a 
program which allows approved non-governmental testing organizations to 
administer standardized tests of U.S. history and government and 
written English on behalf of the Service. Six national organizations 
are currently approved to administer tests, and these six organizations 
have affiliates around the country. The INS needs to establish new 
regulations which will strengthen and improve INS oversight of 
nongovernmental testing organizations to prevent fraud and preserve the 
integrity of the citizenship program.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


The legal authority for these regulatory modifications is set forth 
above in Legal Authority. No aspect of these actions is required by 
statute or court order.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


The INS anticipates a relatively low cost for staff time and resources 
necessary to implement new guidelines to the field on revised testing 
procedures and to review applications from organizations seeking 
approval to administer citizenship tests on behalf of INS. There will 
be a greater need for resources and use of staff time for monitoring 
and oversight of approved testing organizations and their affiliates to 
ensure ongoing compliance with regulatory requirements. The anticipated 
benefits from revising the current regulations include: more efficient 
use of INS resources by prescreening individuals who are unable to 
demonstrate the required knowledge, thereby eliminating interviews for 
these individuals; increased reliability and decreased fraud in test 
results through the use of new standardized tests and oversight of 
nongovernmental testing organizations. The INS anticipates that these 
benefits will substantially exceed the costs.


Risks:


The risks inherent in not pursuing this regulatory initiative include: 
persistence of structural flaws in the current system which require 
correction by regulation; INS' inability, without regulatory change, to 
take adequate measures to minimize fraud in the testing process; and 
diminished public trust in the reliability and integrity of the 
naturalization process.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM                                                           02/00/97
Small Entities Affected:


Businesses, Organizations


Government Levels Affected:


Federal


Additional Information:


INS No. 1275-93


Agency Contact:
Thomas E. Cook
Branch Chief, Naturalization
Examinations
Department of Justice
Immigration and Naturalization Service
425 I Street NW.
Room 3214
Washington, DC 20536
Phone: 202 514-5014
RIN: 1115-AD52
_______________________________________________________________________
DOJ--INS
52. RECOGNIZED PROVIDERS OF IMMIGRATION ASSISTANCE AND FORMS 
PREPARATION SERVICES
Priority:


Other Significant

[[Page 62080]]

Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 8 USC 1103; 8 USC 1252b; 8 USC 1362; 8 USC 1421; 8 USC 1443; 8 USC 
1447; 8 USC 1448; 8 CFR 2.1


CFR Citation:


 8 CFR 292; 8 CFR 310


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


This regulatory change is part of the Immigration and Naturalization 
Service's efforts to increase the availability of high-quality, low-
cost assistance to applicants for naturalization and other immigration 
benefits. It will clarify some regulatory provisions which have been 
confusing to affected parties and expand the partnership between INS 
and community-based organizations. This change will provide procedures 
by which qualifying nonprofit entities may be designated to provide 
assistance on a fee-for-service basis to applicants for various 
immigration benefits.


Statement of Need:


The Service now receives far more applications for naturalization and 
other benefits than in previous years. For example, the number of 
naturalization applications filed has more than tripled from 1992 
levels, and is expected to exceed 1.1 million in fiscal year 1996. 
Other applications, including adjustment of status applications and 
family reunification petitions, have also been subject to dramatic 
increases. Some applications are filed without the required signature 
or the correct fee. Others have blanks where required information 
should appear or are improperly completed. Returning such applications 
or waiting for applicants to provide additional information is an 
inefficient and costly use of government resources, and often results 
in delay for the applicant.
Many different voluntary organizations help individuals prepare their 
applications. The Service has learned that these applications are more 
likely to be complete and legible, expediting processing. Further some 
organizations provide information regarding INS requirements and 
procedures, which helps individuals decide whether and when to file 
applications for naturalization and other immigration benefits. Some 
organizations are currently designated to provide certain services 
under Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) regulations, but the services 
such organizations can provide is limited because they cannot collect 
adequate fees to fund such services. There is also a problem with 
unscrupulous organizations which mislead or otherwise take advantage of 
applicants, or which file fraudulent applications. INS believes that 
increasing the availability of competent, low-cost assistance will 
increase the efficiency and effectiveness of its adjudications 
processes and result in improved service to INS customers.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


The legal basis of authority for these regulatory modifications is set 
forth above in Legal Authority. No aspect of these actions is required 
by statute or court order.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


There will be a relatively small cost for staff time necessary to 
determine the qualifications of organizations and their individual 
employees seeking designation, as well as a small cost for monitoring 
the ongoing quality of such services and the designees' continued 
compliance with the requirements. The benefits include: shortened 
average processing time for applications due to improved accuracy; 
reduced demand for INS staff to answer routine application questions or 
provide forms; better understanding of requirements and procedures by 
potential applicants; fewer filings by clearly ineligible persons, 
saving them and INS time and money; and the potential for enhanced 
relationships between INS and the public in local communities. The INS 
anticipates that these benefits will substantially exceed the costs.


Risks:


The risks inherent in not pursuing this regulatory initiative include: 
continued activity by unqualified providers who take advantage of 
applicants; a fee restriction which hinders the ability of BIA-
qualified providers to provide the services needed by growing numbers 
of applicants for naturalization and other immigration services; and a 
continued impact on INS resources resulting from improperly filed 
applications.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM (INS 1735)                                                05/00/97
Small Entities Affected:


Businesses, Organizations


Government Levels Affected:


State, Federal


Additional Information:


INS No. 1735-95
This regulation would have an impact on State agencies authorized to 
regulate the practice of law in several States. If this regulation is 
adopted, a State could not impose a penalty for the unauthorized 
practice of law on a person engaged in activities permitted under this 
regulation, if the person is authorized to engage in the activities 
pursuant to this regulation. The State could impose a penalty for 
unauthorized practice of law if the person were not authorized to 
practice pursuant to this regulation.


Agency Contact:
Thomas E. Cook
Branch Chief, Naturalization
Examinations
Department of Justice
Immigration and Naturalization Service
425 I Street NW.
Room 3214
Washington, DC 20536
Phone: 202 514-5014
RIN: 1115-AE18
_______________________________________________________________________
DOJ--INS
53.  EXPEDITED EXCLUSION
Priority:


Other Significant


Legal Authority:


 8 USC 1103; 8 USC 1158; 8 USC 1226; 8 USC 1252; 8 USC 1282; 31 USC 
9701; 8 CFR 2


CFR Citation:


 8 CFR 208; 8 CFR 212; 8 CFR 217; 8 CFR 235


Legal Deadline:


None


Expedited Exclusion Provision of AEDPA Effective on November 1, 1996


Abstract:


On April 24, 1996 the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act 
(AEDPA) was enacted. The Immigration and Naturalization Service 
(Service) will publish several regulations dealing with the expeditious 
exclusion of aliens who arrive in the United States with either 
counterfeit documents or no documents at all; with the treatment of

[[Page 62081]]

aliens who entered without inspection as applicants for admission (and 
are therefore subject to exclusion provisions of the law); with the 
mandatory detention of certain criminal aliens; with the deportation of 
certain convicted criminal aliens prior to the completion of their 
sentences; and with other portions of the AEDPA. These provisions will 
improve the efficiency of the Service in preventing the entry of those 
aliens who attempt to enter illegally, and in removing those who do.


Statement of Need:


These regulations are necessary to implement those portions of AEDPA 
dealing with expedited exclusion.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


AEDPA (Pub L. 104-132)


Alternatives:


The rulemaking involves new legislation requiring implementing 
regulations. However, great care has been taken to ensure that the 
regulations are narrowly tailored to meet their objectives and adhere 
to the principles set forth in the President's directive of March 4, 
1995, regarding regulatory reinvention.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


Implementing this statute will involve a moderate amount of capital 
costs for training purposes, and a minimal amount of costs for 
modernization of facilities to ensure that appropriate private 
interview space is available in any Service locations not already 
adequately equipped. There will also be a moderate amount of recurring 
costs involved in ensuring that Asylum Officers are readily available 
for any cases involving aliens who request asylum or otherwise express 
a fear of persecution. In the long run, these costs should be more than 
offset by the reduction in costs for detaining excludable aliens for 
hearings before immigration judges.


Risks:


Failure to promulgate these regulations will result in the Department's 
noncompliance with AEDPA.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM                                                           10/00/96
NPRM Comment Period End                                        12/00/96
Small Entities Affected:


None


Government Levels Affected:


None


Additional Information:


INS No. 1788-96 and 1790-96


Agency Contact:
Linda Loveless
Assistant Chief Inspector
Office of Examinations
Department of Justice
Immigration and Naturalization Service
425 I Street NW.
Room 4064
Washington, DC 20536
Phone: 202 616-7489
RIN: 1115-AE47
_______________________________________________________________________
DOJ--INS

                              -----------

                            FINAL RULE STAGE

                              -----------

54. CONTROL OF EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS
Priority:


Other Significant


Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 8 USC 1101; 8 USC 1103; 8 USC 1255a; 8 USC 1255a note; 8 USC 1324a; 8 
USC 1160; 8 CFR 2


CFR Citation:


 8 CFR 210; 8 CFR 245a; 8 CFR 274a


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


The document reduction rule (INS No. 1399-93) reduces the number of 
Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)-issued documents that are 
acceptable for purposes of completing the Employment Eligibility 
Verification Form (Form I-9). This rule proposes to further simplify 
compliance with the employment eligibility verification requirements 
and address the concerns of employers who allege confusion created by 
the multiplicity of acceptable documents on the Form I-9.
A supplemental proposed rule published on June 22, 1995, at 60 FR 32472 
proposed creating a requirement on the part of the employee to sign an 
attestation in section 3 of Form I-9, during the reverification process 
indicating that they are still authorized to work in the United States 
(INS No. 1399S-94). The supplemental rule also proposed the elimination 
of Federal identification cards as acceptable List B identity 
documents.
The sections of law covered by this regulation are the subject of 
legislation pending in Congress, and anticipated to go to conference. 
In the interest of avoiding the public confusion that would result from 
multiple changes, the Service is reserving action on these regulations 
until the end of the 104th Congress. At that time, if new legislation 
has not been enacted, the Service will make a final determination on 
the timetable for publication of a final rule.


Statement of Need:


In a March 1990 report, the General Accounting Office (GAO) noted that 
the multiplicity of acceptable work eligibility documents can give rise 
to confusion and uncertainty in the minds of employers seeking to 
determine whether individuals are eligible to work. (Immigration 
Reform: Employer Sanctions and the Question of Discrimination 62 (GAO/
GGD-90-62, Mar. 1990)). A reduction in the number of acceptable 
documents should reduce confusion and uncertainty on the part of 
employers, and thereby reduce potential employment discrimination based 
upon misapplication of the employment eligibility verification 
requirements.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


The legal basis of authority for this regulation is set forth above in 
Legal Authority. No aspect of this regulatory action is required by 
statute or court order.


Alternatives:


One often repeated criticism of employer sanctions is the number of 
documents that are acceptable for completing the Form I-9. The Service 
has taken steps to address this criticism. In July 1988, the Service 
committed to the establishment of procedures for a uniform employment 
authorization policy. First, the Service limited the number and types 
of paper documents on which employment could be authorized. Second, the 
Service introduced the standardized Employment Authorization Document 
(Form I-688B). The Service has determined that further steps can be 
taken to streamline the employment

[[Page 62082]]

eligibility verification system by reducing the number of documents 
acceptable for Form I-9 purposes. On September 4, 1996, the Service 
issued a final regulation introducing a new, more secure employment 
authorization document (EAD) which will eventually replace existing 
EADs.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


Employment is often the magnet that attracts individuals to come to or 
stay in the United States illegally. The employer sanctions provisions 
help reduce the strength of this magnet by requiring employers to hire 
only those individuals who may legally work in the United States. This 
rule, by reducing the number of documents that are acceptable for 
employment eligibility verification purposes, will reduce confusion and 
uncertainty on the part of employers in the application of the 
employment eligibility verification requirements. This, in turn, will 
increase employer compliance and thereby result in more jobs being 
available for those who are authorized to work in the United States. In 
addition, by reducing confusion and uncertainty on the part of 
employers, this rule will reduce potential employment discrimination 
based upon misapplication of the employment eligibility verification 
requirement.


Risks:


An employment eligibility verification system that relies on a 
multiplicity of documents, and is difficult to understand, may result 
in employment discrimination based upon misapplication of the 
employment eligibility verification requirements. In addition, a 
complicated employment eligibility verification system may encourage 
fraud and result in individuals who are authorized to work in the 
United States being displaced by unauthorized individuals.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM (INS 1399);58 FR 61846riod End 12/23/93                   11/23/93
Supplemental NPR60 FR 32472S) Comment Period End 7/24/95       06/22/95
Applications Due 1-29-96 Public Notice Pilot Demonstration Program (INS 
        1713)   60 FR 61630                                    11/30/95
Appl. Extension Through 3-8-96 Public Notice Pilot Demonstration 
        Program 61 FR 4378                                     02/06/96
Final Rule INS N61 FR 46534                                    09/04/96
Final Rule (INS 1399)                                          09/00/97
Small Entities Affected:


Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions, Organizations


Government Levels Affected:


State, Local, Federal


Additional Information:


INS No. 1399-92
INS No. 1399S-94 Control of Employment of Aliens Supplemental Rule.; 
Next action undetermined for INS No. 1399 and 1399S; decision on hold 
pending legislation currently before Congress.
INS No. 1399E is an extracted portion of INS No. 1399, being published 
separately to allow for the production of a new, more secure Employment 
Authorization Document.
INS No. 1713-95, Demonstration Project for Electronic I-9s, contact 
Robert Atwater, 202-514-2998.


Agency Contact:
Dea Carpenter
Associate General Counsel
Office of General Counsel
Department of Justice
Immigration and Naturalization Service
425 I Street NW.
Room 6100
Washington, DC 20536
Phone: 202 514-2895
RIN: 1115-AB73
BILLING CODE 4410-01-F