VisaPro.com - Other Departments

Couple from Washington state sentenced for alien harboring and illegal employment

In a recent news release, the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has informed that a husband and wife from northern Washington state have been sentenced to prison after pleading guilty to federal charges stemming from a probe by ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations that revealed the pair had hired and harbored an illegal alien domestic worker.

It is reported that they recruited an impoverished young woman from the Philippines to be their family's live-in domestic servant, and employed her for 3 years. During her employment, the victim was required to work seven days a week, providing full-time childcare, cleaning, cooking and other domestic services. She was paid $200 to $240 per month.

The couple paid the victim $57,000 in restitution at the time of their guilty pleas, and they are barred from having any contact with the victim or her family.

US-China Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific Region

During their meeting today, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Republic of China Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi reviewed the wide range of common interests between the United States and China and discussed ways to advance the shared goal of maintaining peace, stability, and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific region.

In pursuit of this goal, Secretary Clinton and Foreign Minister Yang announced the intention of the United States and China to pursue several areas of practical cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region. Specifically, the United States and China:

Intend to cooperate with the Government of Timor-Leste to promote agricultural development and food security in Timor-Leste;
Decided that the U.S. Agency for International Development and the China Earthquake Administration will cooperate with ASEAN and the UN-led International Search and Rescue Advisory Group (INSARAG) to strengthen collaboration on Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) in Asia; and
Announced the intention of U.S. Pacific Command’s Center of Excellence in Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance and the People’s Liberation Army to cooperate with ASEAN partners to strengthen regional capacity building efforts in the area of Disaster Relief and Response.

Secretary Clinton and Foreign Minister Yang also underscored their resolve to identify additional areas of concrete regional cooperation to advance common interests and contribute to efforts to build a more stable, peaceful, and prosperous Asia-Pacific region for the 21st century.

H-1B Employees Have Right to Stay in the US While Extension is Pending

A judge in Connecticut recognized that a federal regulation allows H-1B employees - including Indians - to continue working for 240 days pending the adjudication of their extension applications and that "work authorization is part and parcel of their authorization to be in the country, not a separate matter."

The ruling came following an argument in an amicus brief by American Immigration Council (AIC) and American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA).

"Permitting the initiation of removal proceedings during this period would thus be unfair to employees and employers alike, according to the (court) decision," the American Immigration Council said in a statement.

The ruling is a victory for the rule of law and for common sense, said Melissa Crow, director of the American Immigration Council's Legal Action Centre.

"If H-1B employees can continue working while extension applications on their behalf are pending, it defies logic to argue that they can be arrested, detained and removed without notice," Crow said.

In the case before the Connecticut judge, the plaintiff, a Lebanese national, was gainfully employed as a medical researcher when his employer requested an H-1B extension in early 2004, more than a month before his H-1B status expired.

Though his employer paid a USD 1,000 fee for premium processing of the application, government never adjudicated it and refused to respond to requests for information.

Nearly seven months after the request was filed, immigration agents arrested the plaintiff for allegedly "overstaying" his initial period of admission. He was placed in removal proceedings and detained for nearly two months.

In their amicus brief, AIC and AILA argued that current laws provides for work authorization, while a timely-filed extension application is pending, necessarily authorizes H-1B employees to remain in the US.

Accordingly, they cannot be arrested solely for staying in the US while extension applications are being adjudicated.

With supporting declarations from three companies that rely on H-1B workers, the brief argued that arresting non-citizens with pending extension applications would threaten to disrupt key sectors of the US economy and undermine the goals of the H-1B programme.

In the decision, the judge said the AIC-AILA brief "highlights the substantial interest that employers have in the administration of the H-1B visa programme, the lack of notice provided by the regulation at issue, and the hardship that the government's proposed interpretation would impose upon them."

Source: DDINews.gov.in

Grassley's Letter to DHS Inspector General, Explaining his Concern about L-1 Visa Fraud and Abuse

In an effort to root out fraud and abuse from foreign visa programs, Senator Chuck Grassley has asked the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) inspector general to investigate the L intracompany transferee visa program. The L-1 visa program permits companies with businesses in both the United States and overseas to transfer employees from their foreign operations to their operations in the United States.

“I have grown increasingly concerned that loopholes within the L-1 visa program have led to manipulation and broad overreach by those who use the program and have resulted in a great deal of fraud and abuse within the program,” Grassley said.

The L-1 visa program was last reviewed by the inspector general in 2006. The report said that the program was vulnerable to abuse. It appears that the recommendations made in that report were never implemented.

Grassley outlined specific areas of concern in his letter to Acting Homeland Security Inspector General Charles Edwards. Among those concerns are an unclear number of L-1 visa holders actually in the United States, a broad definition of “specialized knowledge,” a disconnect between the Departments of Homeland Security and State on blanket petitions, and the alleged use of L-1 visas to circumvent requirements of H-1B visas.

As a proponent of legal immigration, Grassley has been working to eliminate fraud and abuse within existing visa programs. He has been a staunch advocate for reform of the H-1B program and has introduced legislation in previous congresses to address the issues found through his years of oversight.

Here is a copy of Grassley’s letter to Edwards.

March 29, 2011

The Honorable Charles K. Edwards
Acting Inspector General
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, D.C. 20528

Dear Acting Inspector General Edwards:

I am writing to you regarding my concerns about the L intracompany transferee visa program, and am requesting your office’s help to investigate the fraud and abuse in the program. The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) completed a report in January 2006 reviewing the vulnerabilities and potential abuses of the L-1 visa. I believe an updated study is warranted.

The review completed by the OIG in 2006 concluded that the L-1 program was vulnerable to potential abuse because of four main weaknesses:

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) adjudicators found it difficult to verify that L-1A managers and executives would in fact be employed by the importing U.S. company in a managerial/executive function;
the definition of “specialized knowledge” category was so broad as to be meaningless, thus making almost every L-1B petition approvable;
adjudicators in the U.S. found it difficult to verify the existence of a firm’s operation abroad; and
opportunities for abuse created by new office petitions and self-petitions. The report also touched on displacement of American workers and the use of “body shops” to transfer workers to third-party sites.

At the time, the OIG had three recommendations for USCIS. First, the OIG recommended that USCIS establish a procedure to obtain overseas verification of pending H and L petitions by Department of State offices in related countries. Secondly, USCIS was to explore whether Visa Security Officers could assist in checking the bona fides of L petitions submitted by petitioners in the countries in which the officers are assigned. Finally, USCIS was to seek legislative remedies after consultation with others in the L Visa Interagency Task Force.

Unfortunately, many of the recommendations your office made in 2006 have not been implemented or adequately addressed. An updated report from your office should include the extent to which these recommendations have been fulfilled, or an explanation as to why they were ignored. I’d like to know why the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and USCIS have failed to fully undertake the OIG’s recommendations.

Serious loopholes continue to exist or be manipulated by foreign nationals and the companies that use the L visa program. There’s growing concern by many experts that companies are turning to L visas when the supply of H-1B visas are low. There is also a general consensus that L visas are being used to bring in “rank and file” employees rather than top-level professionals with truly “specialized knowledge.”

Below are additional aspects, expressed concerns, and questions that remain about the L visa program that need a more thorough review so that USCIS and Congress can improve the way these visas are processed and adjudicated.

Number of L visa holders currently living in the U.S.: It’s unclear how many L visa holders are in the United States. The Departments of State and Homeland Security may have separate figures because of their unique roles in adjudicating these visas. The Department of State, for example, is responsible for adjudicating petitions by applicants for L-1B specialized knowledge visas under an approved blanket petition; it is my understanding these approvals are not necessarily included in USCIS statistics. Moreover, the program was not created specifically for computer or IT companies, yet they are the biggest users. From which countries do L visa holders come, and how has the trend changed, if at all, in the past 10 years? I would like a complete statistical analysis of the numbers, including a breakdown of data by L-1A and L-1B, and by employer.

Specialized Knowledge: Congress defined L-1B “specialized knowledge” in the Immigration and Nationality Act (Section 214(c)(2)(B)) to be “specialized knowledge of the company product and its application in international markets or has an advanced level of knowledge of processes and procedures for the company.”

Despite this definition, there’s concern that USCIS may be interpreting “specialized knowledge” to include someone highly skilled or someone with specialized knowledge of certain products, but not necessarily relating to the petitioning company. Moreover, it appears that the definition has loosened up over time and that USCIS and the Department of State may now interpret the definition differently. Recently, on January 11, 2011, the Department of State issued new guidance to consular officers on how to adjudicate visas under the specialized knowledge category. I have attached the guidance for you. Has USCIS updated any guidance on this issue for its adjudicators? USCIS stated in its November 9, 2010, response to the USCIS Ombudsman’s 2010 Report to Congress that the USCIS Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) “is working to publish a precedent decision or series of decisions on specialized knowledge” that would be published “in the near future.” I am interested in knowing if USCIS should act immediately on the AAO’s decisions, and if the OIG has any recommendations in this area.

Using the L Visa to Set Up a New Branch Office: Under regulation, those establishing a new office in the United States have one year to prove that they have, in fact, established a new branch or office. The petitioner must provide evidence of business plan implementation, including wages paid to employees and the businesses’ financial statements, in order for his or her L-1 visa to be renewed.

Are the existing regulations for this category sufficient? Are adjudicators doing the necessary follow-up a year after the fact to make sure the new business or office is doing what the petitioner said he/she would? Do officers have the expertise or training to know if the financial data provided to them is accurate, or do they take it at face value? What more can be done to root out abuse or potential abuse in this category of the L visa program?

Also, under current law, spouses of L visa holders are eligible to work. Some fraud officers have said that L-1A managers/executives coming to the U.S. to start up a new (usually very small) office, oftentimes hire their own spouses, insert them into the organizational structure of the new office, and then claim to manage them in order to substantiate their claim to be an L-1A “manager.” Does USCIS tolerate this practice, or do they ever revoke/deny L visas upon learning of this practice? Should spouses of L-1 visa holders be eligible to work for new offices in such situations?

Blanket Petitions: The Immigration and Nationality Act allows an employer to file a “blanket” petition, which was intended to streamline the process for multinational firms and reduce the processing times for employees that fall under the petition. The blanket petition is approved by DHS, but the Department of State does the adjudication of individual petitions under the blanket. It appears that there’s a substantial disconnect between the two departments – i.e. DHS doesn’t exactly know the names of the aliens approved under the blanket or the number of petitions approved.

Are the two agencies working together, or are there lapses in information sharing? Is there potential for abuse or fraud in the blanket? Should the blanket petition process be maintained, or are there improvements needed to the program? For how long is the blanket petition valid? Is there any linkage between those approved for blanket petitions and those being investigated for fraud/abuse?

Also, the regulations stipulate that a blanket petition can be approved if, among other things, they fit the below criteria.

The petitioner and the other qualifying organizations have obtained approval of petitions for at least ten “L” managers, executives, or specialized knowledge professionals during the previous 12 months; or have U.S. subsidiaries or affiliates with combined annual sales of at least $25 million; or have a United States work force of at least 1,000 employees.

Do these criteria automatically lead to approval, or are other factors considered when adjudicating a blanket petition? Should these standards be updated?

Wage Rates, Lengths of Stay and Outsourcing: First, because the L visa program does not have any wage requirements associated with it, many observers believe that companies are using the L instead of the H-1B visa. Wages for L-1’s are tied to their home country, not the prevailing wage in the United States. I would like to know what the L-1 salaries are, relative to co-workers’ salaries. Can the OIG audit or do a random sample of the actual W-2 wage rates of L visa holders? What happens to the Social Security earnings of L-1 workers? How do employers pay for, and how much do they pay for, housing and other allowances?

Second, because there’s concern that companies are using the program to import hundreds of workers at one time, then take the knowledge and the job back to their home country, it’s important to know how the L visa is being used and for how long they are using them in the United States. The law allows 5-7 years for workers to stay in the country, but it’s unknown if companies are using the program for short term assignments (as was intended) or as an avenue to permanent residency. Data on length of stays would be beneficial to understanding how companies are truly using the program.Finally, section 214(c)(2)(F) of the Immigration and Nationality Act requires the L visa holder to be controlled and supervised principally by the petitioning employer. Has this change in law from 2004 helped reduce the abuse of employers to “outsource” or place their L visa workers at third-party sites?

L visa worker recourse/enforcement: Every petitioner is required to pay a “fraud detection” fee of $500. The fee is then provided to the Departments of State and Homeland Security to investigate fraud and abuse. How are these fees being used? What enforcement efforts are being made specifically to L visas? How many fraud charges have been brought against L-1 employers? What is the process by which L-1 workers can complain to the feds? Are additional protections for visa holders and American workers warranted?

Again, the Congress and the Department of Homeland Security would benefit from an updated and independent assessment by your office on the L visa program. I would appreciate your attention to the issues raised in this letter and make an official request for your office to issue an updated report on the abuses of the L visa program by the end of the year. Thank you for your attention to this matter and I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Charles E. Grassley
United States Senator

Senator Grassley Concerned that Companies are Using B-1 Visa Program to Circumvent H-1B Requirements

Senator Chuck Grassley is asking for a thorough investigation by the Departments of State (DOS) and Homeland Security (DHS) of the B-1 visa program and the use of this visa program by employers to recruit foreign workers who are then not subject to the cap and the prevailing wage requirements of the H-1B visa program.

"When unemployment remains at a staggering 8.8 percent, we should be focusing our oversight efforts on employers who are taking advantage of the system and importing foreign workers to the detriment of Americans,” Grassley said.

In his letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, Grassley questioned the “B-1 in lieu of H-1B” policy currently in place. Hewrote, “Under this low threshold (of the B-1 visa), a company could import workers via the B-1 business visitor visa and evade the H-1B visa cap and prevailing wage requirements that would otherwise apply to such workers so long as the workers could show that their paychecks were still coming from the foreign company.”

Grassley also referenced a formal complaint against Infosys that details how Infosys management in India decided to use the B-1 business visitor visa program to get around H-1B program restrictions. The plaintiff alleges that Infosys was importing foreign workers as B-1 business visitors under the guise of attending meetings rather than working for a wage as an employee of a U.S. company, which is forbidden under the statute and regulations governing the B-1 visa program.

Grassley argues that American workers should be given first consideration by companies looking to import foreign workers. Grassley has led the effort to close loopholes and enact reform in the H-1B visa program. He has introduced legislation in previous Congresses to reform the H-1B and L visa programsand is planning on introducing a bill again in the 112^th Congress.

Here is a copy of the text of Grassley’s letter.

April 14, 2011

The Honorable Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, D.C. 20520

The Honorable Janet Napolitano
Secretary
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
245 Murray Lane, Mailstop 0150
Washington, D.C. 20528-0150

Dear Secretary Clinton and Secretary Napolitano:

I’m very concerned about fraudulent actions that at least one foreign-based company has allegedly been taking in order to get around the requirements and U.S. worker protections of the H-1B visa program, and more generally, about provisions in current guidance to visa adjudicators that actually authorize such evasion of Congressional intent.

On February 23, 2010, a U.S. employee of Infosys Technologies Limited, Inc. (“Infosys”) filed a complaint in the Circuit Court of Lowndes County, Alabama, alleging that his employer was “sending lower level and unskilled foreigners to the United States to work in full-time positions at Infosys’ customer sites in direct violation of immigration laws.” The plaintiff described ways that Infosys, one of the top ten H-1B petitioning companies, had worked to “creatively” get around the H-1B visa program in order to bring in low-skilled and low-wage workers, resulting in visa fraud against the U.S. Government.

Infosys, by its own admission, is an “H-1B dependent employer.” Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, H-1B dependent employers must take good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers and to offer them compensation that is at least as great as that required to be offered to H-1B nonimmigrants.

The formal complaint against Infosys details how Infosys management in India decided to use the B-1 business visitor visa program to get around H-1B program restrictions. The plaintiff alleges that Infosys was importing foreign workers as B-1 business visitors under the guise of attending meetings rather than working for a wage as an employee of a U.S. company, which is forbidden under the statute and regulations governing the B-1 visa program. Under section 101(a)(15)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, a B-1 visa holder may not come to the U.S. “for the purpose of…performing skilled or unskilled labor.” Under State Department regulations, a B-1 visa holder may not engage in “local employment or labor for hire.” If the allegations against Infosys are substantiated, American workers will have been hurt by this company’s fraudulent actions, and the integrity of both the B-1 and H-1B visa programs will have been compromised.

More troubling than the illegal ways a company can get around the H-1B program’s restrictions using the B-1 visa program are the legal ways companies can use the B-1 visa program to defy the intent of Congress. For example, the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) currently authorizes the granting of B-1 visas to foreign workers who should otherwise be seeking H-1B visas in cases where the worker is employed by a foreign company and is coming to the U.S. to work at a U.S. client of that foreign company. Specifically, the FAM states that to qualify for such B-1 in lieu of H-1B visas, “the employee must customarily be employed by the foreign firm, the employing entity must pay the employee’s salary, and the source of the employee’s salary must be abroad.” Under this low threshold, a company could import workers via the B-1 business visitor visa and evade the H-1B visa cap and prevailing wage requirements that would otherwise apply to such workers so long as the workers could show that their paychecks were still coming from the foreign company. I believe a thorough review of the “B-1 in lieu of H-1B” provision in the Foreign Affairs Manual is warranted by both of your Departments, especially at a time when American workers are vying against foreign workers for employment in this country.

In light of the allegations against Infosys, and the potential for other employers to abuse the B-1 visa to get around the H-1B visa program, I would appreciate your cooperation to get to the bottom of the situation. I would also like information about how the B-1 visa is being used by employers and processed by consular officers, including the following:

Statistics with regard to the numerical distribution of B-1 visas, including which employers are using them, how many B-1 visas are petitioned for and approved each year, and the lengths of time a visa holder remains in the United States on a B-1 visa.

The number of “B-1 in lieu of H-1B” visas issued each year for the past five years, including the posts where such visas were issued, the U.S. companies hosting such workers, and the foreign companies paying the worker’s salary.

How does the Department of State verify an employer’s claim that a B-1 visa holder will attend a meeting, convention, or other business appointment in the United States?

What actions, if any, are being taken against employers who abuse the B-1 visa program? Will the Departments consider barring such employers from any visa program if found guilty of misusing the visa system? Will the Departments cease to approve visas for Infosys until the lawsuit in Alabama is settled? If not, what additional oversight and/or actions will be taken until the Infosys lawsuit is finalized?

What is the legal basis for the State Department’s policy known as “B-1 in lieu of H-1B”? The Immigration and Naturalization Service, in 1993, proposed a regulation to eliminate the “B-1 in lieu of H” category citing inconsistency with Congressional intent. Will the Department consider changes to the Foreign Affairs Manual so that this means of entry is not abused? Will the Department consider eliminating this provision altogether? How does the Department of Homeland Security feel about this State Department policy today?

My hope is that your Departments will cooperate to make sure that the B-1 visa program is not being abused by employers who wish to get around the annual caps and prevailing wage requirements imposed by the H-1B visa program. I look forward to your review of the issues I have raised, and would appreciate a response to my questions no later than April 28, 2011.

Sincerely,

Charles E. Grassley
United States Senator

Christmas Holiday Travel Reminder from CBP

U.S. Customs and Border Protection is reminding travelers planning trips across the border this weekend into the United States to make sure they have their proper documents and to anticipate heavy traffic during this Christmas season.

Border traffic volumes are expected to increase during this holiday weekend and all travelers are reminded of a few simple steps they can employ to cross the border more efficiently.

Plan your trip, avoid peak travel times typically between the hours of 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. and consider alternate ports of entry. If bringing presents across the border, ensure that any festive wrappings do not obstruct inspection of the items. Simple alternatives are to leave one end open for inspection or wrap the gift item at your final destination.

The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI), implemented on June 1, 2009 requires U.S. and Canadian citizens, age 16 and older to present a valid, acceptable document that denotes both identity and citizenship when entering the U.S. by land or sea. WHTI-approved travel documents include a passport, U. S. passport card, enhanced driver’s licenses (EDLs) or a Trusted Traveler Program card (NEXUS, SENTRI and FAST).

CBP strongly encourages travelers to obtain a radio frequency identification (RFID)-enabled travel document such as a U.S. Passport Card, Enhanced Driver’s License/Enhanced Identification Card or Trusted Traveler Program card (NEXUS, SENTRI or FAST/EXPRES) to expedite their entry and make crossing the border more efficient.

Read the article 7 Tips for Travelers to the U.S. for a Safe Journey.

CBP Reminder: New ESTA Fee to Begin from September 8

U.S. Customs and Border Protection reminds Visa Waiver Program travelers the $14 fee for the Electronic System for Travel Authorization applications that will begin Wednesday, Sept. 8.

A fee of $4 will recover the costs incurred by CBP of providing and administering the ESTA system and is in addition to the mandatory $10 travel promotion fee established by the Travel Promotion Act of 2009. The total fee for a new or renewed ESTA will be $14.

All payments for electronic travel authorization applications must be made by credit card or debit card when applying for or renewing an ESTA. Payment arrangements may be made through a third party, such as a travel agent, since the name on the credit card does not have to match the name of the traveler. The ESTA application will not be submitted for processing until all payment information is received.

Travelers with an approved ESTA will not need to pay the ESTA fee when updating an ESTA application. However, travelers with new passports and re-applying for an ESTA will need to pay the ESTA fee.

ICE Sentenced Nine Individuals in Ohio Marriage Fraud Scheme

Nine people pleaded guilty to charges connected with their involvement in a scheme in central Ohio to arrange marriages between foreign nationals and U.S. citizens. The sentences were announced by the U.S. Attorney's Office and U.S. Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE).

Brian Moskowitz, ICE special agent in charge of the Office of Homeland Security Investigations in Ohio and Michigan, along with Carter M. Stewart, U. S. Attorney for the Southern District of Ohio, announced the sentences by U.S. District Judge Algenon L. Marbley.

The sentences were imposed on the following individuals:

Hasan Salohutdinov of Dublin, Ohio, and an illegal alien from Uzbekistan, was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment followed by deportation. He pleaded guilty on April 5, 2010, to one count of conspiracy to commit marriage fraud and on count of presenting false statements to U.S. immigration authorities. Salohutdinov introduced other Uzbeks into the scheme in order that they might pay to engage in sham marriages.
Dmitry Pani also of Dublin, and an illegal alien from Estonia, was sentenced to one year imprisonment. Pani also pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit marriage fraud.
Sviatlana A. Piskunova of Columbus pleaded guilty to conspiracy and sentenced to time served.
Laura Elizabeth Grace Scott of Columbus pleaded guilty to conspiracy and was sentenced to two years probation which includes six months of home confinement.
Courtnie Susann Good of Columbus pleaded guilty to marriage fraud and was sentenced to two years probation which includes six months of home confinement with electronic monitoring.
Elbek A. Saidjanov of Philadelphia, Penn., pleaded guilty to marriage fraud and was sentenced to time served, about seven and one-half months.
Iskander Odilovich Tairov, of Galloway, Ohio, pleaded guilty to marriage fraud and was sentenced to two years probation.
Brent James Woods of Columbus pleaded guilty to marriage fraud and was sentenced to four years probation including four months in Alvis House.
Djafar B. Sobirov of Columbus pleaded guilty to marriage fraud and was sentenced to two years probation.

Pani established an informal "business" to find U.S. citizens who would accept money to enter into sham marriages with aliens for the purpose of evading a provision of the immigration laws of the United States, and to aid and abet in the making of false statements to immigration authorities with respect to those sham marriages in an effort to convince the immigration authorities that they were genuine marriages.

Salohutdinov, who had entered into a sham marriage in Illinois, moved to Ohio and came to know Pani. Salohutdinov and Piskunova joined the conspiracy with Pani and arranged sham marriages for certain other aliens that Salohudinov knew of.

The sham marriages typically occurred shortly after the alien and the U.S. citizen met each other, sometimes even the same day. Saidjanov, an alien, came to Columbus from Philadelphia, Penn., and paid Pani to arrange a sham marriage on Feb. 9, 2009, with Good. Saidjanov also paid his girlfriend, who is an alien, too, to enter into a sham marriage on the following day. These sham marriages took place at The Columbus Wedding Chapel, in Columbus. After the marriages, Sadijanov and his girlfriend returned to Philadelphia, and did not live with their new American spouses.

"Today's sentences are a reminder that America's legal immigration system is not for sale," said Moskowitz. "ICE will aggressively investigate and bring to justice those who seek to compromise the integrity of that system for personal profit or to avoid immigration laws."

Stewart commended the investigation conducted by ICE agents, and the assistance of the ICE Office of Enforcement and Removal, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and the Columbus Police Department, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Dan Brown, who prosecuted the case.

CBP Reminds Travelers from Visa Waiver Program Countries to Complete Online Travel Authorization

On the one-year anniversary of implementing the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA), the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Customs and Border Protection reminds U.S. bound travelers from Visa Waiver Program (VWP) countries of the ESTA requirement. Beginning January 20, CBP will initiate a 60-day transition to enforced ESTA compliance for air carriers; VWP travelers without an approved ESTA may not be allowed to board a U.S. bound plane.

ESTA is an electronic travel authorization that all citizens of VWP countries must obtain prior to boarding a carrier to travel by air or sea to the United States under the VWP. ESTA has been mandatory since Jan. 12, 2009 for all nationals of VWP countries traveling to the U.S under the VWP. The requirement does not affect U.S. citizens returning from overseas or citizens of VWP countries traveling on a valid U.S. visa.

ESTA applications may be submitted at any time prior to travel, and once approved, generally will be valid for up to two years or until the applicant’s passport expires, whichever comes first. Authorizations are valid for multiple entries into the U.S. The Department of Homeland Security recommends that ESTA applications be submitted as soon as an applicant begins making travel plans.

VWP travelers are required to log onto the ESTA Web site and complete an online application. The web-based system prompts applicants to answer basic biographic and eligibility questions typically requested on a paper I-94W form; ESTA is expected to completely replace the paper I-94W in the coming months. A third party, such as a relative, a friend, or a travel agent, may submit an application on behalf of a VWP traveler.

The ESTA Web site is available in 21 languages: Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Hungarian, Icelandic, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Latvian, Lithuanian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Slovak, Slovenian, Spanish and Swedish.

DHS Secretary Napolitano Streamlines Citizenship Application Process for Members of the Military

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano today announced the publication of a rule formalizing DHS' longstanding policy to expedite and streamline the citizenship process for men and women bravely serving in America's armed forces.

"The foundation of our national security is the patriotic service and extraordinary sacrifices made by the men and women of our armed forces," said Secretary Napolitano. "Expediting the citizenship process for service members reflects our commitment to honoring those who come from all over the world to serve our country and become its newest citizens."

The rule amends DHS regulations to conform to the National Defense Authorization Act of 2004, reducing the time requirements for naturalization through military service from three years to one year for applicants who served during peacetime, and extending benefits to members of the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve of the U.S. Armed Forces. Service members who have served honorably in an active-duty status or in the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve for any time since Sept. 11, 2001, can file immediately for citizenship.

The rule also eliminates the requirement for members of the military to file biographic information forms (Form G-325B) with their naturalization applications-removing administrative redundancy and increasing efficiency for those who risk their lives for the nation’s security.

DOL Releases FAQs on Filing and Processing of Prevailing Wage Determination

Question: What labor certification programs are affected by the new prevailing wage process administered by the National Prevailing Wage and Helpdesk Center (NPWHC)?
Answer: As described in the Department’s December 4, 2009 Federal Register Notice (74 FR 63796), the National Prevailing Wage and Helpdesk Center (NPWHC) will process Prevailing Wage Determination (PWD) requests for H1B, H1B1 (Chile/Singapore), H1C (if reauthorized by Congress), H2B, E3 (Australia) programs, and the permanent labor certification program (PERM).

Question: What form should I use to request a Prevailing Wage Determination?
Answer: An employer must use ETA Form 9141 to request a PWD from the NPWHC.

Question: How do I file a PWD request?
Answer: To request a PWD, an employer must mail a completed ETA Form 9141 to the NPWHC at the following address:

U.S. Department of Labor
Employment and Training Administration
National Prevailing Wage and Helpdesk Center
Attn: PWD Request
1341 G Street, NW
Suite 201
Washington, DC 200053142

Question: Will the NPWHC accept prevailing wage determination requests via fax, email, or other electronic means?
Answer: No. Initially, the NPWHC will only accept mailed in ETA Forms 9141. The Department is, however, in the process of creating a prevailing wage module on its iCert portal.

Question: Once the NPWHC makes a PWD, how will I receive it?
Answer: The Department’s strong preference is for the electronic transmittal of PWDs. Therefore, we encourage all requestors to include their email addresses
on the ETA Form 9141, under item B15. Once a determination is made, the NPWHC will email the requestor an electronic copy of the PWD. In order to
receive emails from the NPWHC, requestors should ensure that the domain @dol.gov is not blocked by their email provider. If the requestor does not provide an email address on its ETA Form 9141, item B15, the NPWHC will send the PWD to the requestor’s mailing address by regular mail.

Question: How can I obtain assistance in preparing a PWD request?
Answer: Persons with questions regarding the preparation of PWD should consult the OFLC website: www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov

Question: Once I submit a PWD request, how long will it take to receive a determination?
Answer: The NPWHC is working to provide Prevailing Wage Determinations as quickly as possible, in the firstin, firstout (FIFO) order. However, determination times may fluctuate somewhat as the Department works to centralize processing of PWD requests at the NPWHC. Therefore, we continue to encourage requestors to submit their ETA Forms 9141 at least 60 days in advance of the employers’ initial recruitment efforts.

Question: What do I do once I receive my PWD?
Answer: Once an employer receives a PWD, the employer may begin recruitment or file an application for foreign labor certification, depending on the program. The employer must follow programspecific rules and regulations for filing foreign labor certification applications. In addition, employers may refer to
OFLC’s website: www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov for more information on labor certification programs.

Question: I already sent a PWD request to the State Workforce Agency (SWA) and have not yet received a response. Will the SWA process my request?
Answer: SWAs have been instructed to complete all PWD requests received on or prior to December 31, 2009. Any PWD request received at a SWA between January 1, 2010 and up to and including January 15, 2010 will be forward by the SWA to the NPWHC. Any PWD request received at a SWA after January 15, 2010 will be returned to the requestor with instructions on how to file the PWD request with the NPWHC.

Question: I sent a request to the Chicago National Processing Center (CNPC) for an H2B Prevailing Wage Determination. Will the CNPC process my request?
Answer: The CNPC will complete all H2B PWD requests received on or prior to December 31, 2009. H2B PWD requests received at the CNPC between
January 1, 2010 and up to and including January 15, 2010 will be forward by the CNPC to the NPWHC. However, any H2B PWD request received at the CNPC after January 15, 2010 will be returned to the requestor along with written instructions on how to file a PWD request with the NPWHC.

Question: What do I do if I have a problem or issue with a PWD request I submitted to the NPWHC prior to receiving a determination?
Answer: For issues with PWD requests prior determinations being issued, please email the NPWHC at FLC.PWD@dol.gov.

Question: I received a PWD from the NPWHC, but I misplaced it. How can I get a duplicate copy of the PWD?
Answer: To request a duplicate PWD, send an email to FLC.PWD@dol.gov. The NPWHC will send an exact duplicate of the PWD to the requestor named on the ETA Form 9141.

Question: How do I request a PWD based upon a source other than OES?
Answer: On the ETA Form 9141 item D.a.6 (Job Duties), after the description of job duties, include a sentence surrounded by asterisks (***) requesting the use of a specific source, with the name, edition, revision and publication date as appropriate. In addition, after entering the employers’ job title in item D.a.1, enter the title or occupation name and code, as appropriate in square brackets.

Example
D.a.6: *** Request SCA WD 950221
(Rev.23)
Emergency Incident/Fire
Safety Services ***
D.a.1: Site Sample Technician [30210 Laboratory
Technician]

Question: What supporting documentation should I submit with my ETA Form 9141 to request the use of SCA or DBA wage?
Answer: No supporting documentation is required to request the use of SCA or DBA wage. If we need additional information to make a PWD, we will send a
letter to the requestor asking for specific information.

Question: What documentation should I submit in addition to ETA Form 9141 when the job opportunity is covered by a collective bargaining agreement (CBA)?
Answer: Submit the following at the time you submit the ETA Form 9141:

A copy of the relevant portion of the CBA;
A letter, on letterhead, from the employer, stating the relevant section of the CBA, the CBA job title, and the appropriate wage; and
A letter, on letterhead, from the collective bargaining unit’s (union) authorized representative, stating the relevant section of the CBA, the
CBA job title, and the appropriate wage.

Question: What documents do I need to send with a request to use an employer provided/published or employer conducted/commissioned survey?
Answer: The NPWHC will consider wage information provided by the employer in making a PWD. An employer must provide the following information pertaining to the survey:

The name of the published survey;
The publication schedule for the survey. This should include the publication date of the requested survey, the date of the previous version of the survey and the date of the next anticipated release of the survey;
When the data was collected;
A description of the job duties or activities used in the survey; and
The methodology used in the survey:
How the universe is defined;
How the sample size was determined
How the participants were selected; and
- The number of employers surveyed for the occupation in the area;
- The number of wage value responses (employees) for the occupation in the area;
A list of employer participants or explanation of how the cross industry nature of the survey was maintained;
How the presented wage was determined and if it is the “mean” or “median”;
Any other appropriate information on the survey’s methodology;
The area covered by the survey or relevant portion thereof and an explanation of any expansion of the area beyond normal commuting distance, when applicable.

Question: How do I request that a Higher Education American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act (ACWIA) wage be used?
Answer: On the ETA Form 9141 item D.a.6 (Job Duties), after the description of job duties, include the following statement surrounded by asterisks: “***This
employers is an institution of higher education or a research entity under 20 CFR 656.40(e).***”

Question: For H2B only: How do I indicate on ETA Form 9141 that I want to use the H2B special procedures for itineraries?
Answer: On the ETA Form 9141 item D.a.6 (Job Duties), after the description of job duties include the following statement surrounded by asterisks: “***This
position is for H2B temporary employment in the <particular H2B special procedure industry>. An itinerary is attached.***”

Question: What information should I include to get PWDs for the various locations under the H2B special procedures for itineraries?
Answer: The itinerary must include the following:

The place of employment with full address if available; use the name of the area covered if there is no street address such as George
Washington National Forest;
The county or equivalent for that address;
Any additional work site in that area;
The begin and end date in that work site; and
Each page must include, as entered on the ETA Form 9141 on page one:
- the Employer’s Name
- the trade (DBA) Name
- the Employer’s Job Title
- the date of the request

DOL Published Proposed Rule to Increase Non-Immigrant Visa Application Fees

On December 14, 2009, the Department of State published a proposed rule in the Federal Register to increase the nonimmigrant visa application processing fees, also called the Machine-Readable Visa (MRV) fee, and Border Crossing Card (BCC) fees. The proposed rule also establishes a tiered structure with separate fees for different visa categories.

The Department is proposing the increase to ensure sufficient resources to cover the increasing cost of processing nonimmigrant visas (NIVs). This increase applies both to non-immigrant visas placed in passports and to border crossing cards issued to certain adult applicants in Mexico.

The new tiered fee structure was created to cover the higher unit costs for processing certain categories of nonimmigrant visas that are more complicated and require more in-depth consideration than most other categories of nonimmigrant visas U.S. law requires the Department to attempt to recover the cost of processing non-immigrant visas through the collection of the application fees. Because of ongoing process and security enhancements, the $131 fee set on January 1, 2008 is lower than the current, actual cost of processing non-immigrant visas.

Under the proposed rule, applicants for all visas that are not petition-based, including B1/B2 tourist and business visitor visas and all student and exchange-visitor visas, would pay a fee of $140.

Applicants for petition-based visas would pay an application fee of $150. These categories include:

H visa for temporary workers and trainees
L visa for Intracompany transferees
O visa for aliens with extraordinary ability
P visa for athletes, artists and entertainers
Q visa for international cultural exchange visitors
R visa for religious occupations

The application fee for K visas for fiancé(e)s of U.S. citizens would be $350. The fee for E visas for treaty-traders and treaty-investors would be $390.

The Department will not begin collecting the new proposed fees until it considers public comments and publishes a final rule.

FAQs on DOS’ Proposed Rule to Increase the Non-Immigrant Visa Application Fees

Q: Why is the Department of State proposing to increase the basic nonimmigrant visa application fee to $140 from its current $131?

A: The Department is required by law to recover the cost of processing nonimmigrant visas through the collection of the MRV fee. Periodically, independent contractors conduct a Cost of Service Study to determine direct and indirect costs to the U.S. Government of providing consular services, such as nonimmigrant visas. Such a study was completed in June using an activity-based costing model, which is standard for estimating the cost of government services. The Study determined that the cost of accepting, adjudicating, and issuing nonimmigrant visas will be greater than $131 in Fiscal Year 2010, which began October 1, 2009. Also, since the last fee increase in 2008, there have been new security-related costs, new IT systems have been put in place, and there is a new mandate from Congress to charge nonimmigrant visa applicants $1 to support programs to combat trafficking in persons.

Q: When do the new processing fees go into effect?

A: The Department is proposing these new fees in a Federal Register notice, but will not implement them until it reviews and considers any comments received from the public and publishes a final rule. Applicants must start paying the new processing fees once the Department publishes that second, final rule.

Q: Why is the Department of State establishing new, higher fees for certain types of nonimmigrant visas which previously cost $131, the same as all other nonimmigrant visas?

A: An independent study of consular operations costs shows that certain categories of nonimmigrant visas are more complicated and require more in-depth consideration than most other categories of nonimmigrant visas. Therefore, those categories of nonimmigrant visas have higher unit costs. The cost of accepting, adjudicating, and issuing the following categories of visas are appreciably higher than for other categories: E (treaty trader and investor); H (temporary worker or trainee); K (fiancé(e)); L (Intracompany transferee); O (alien with extraordinary ability); P (athlete, artist or entertainer); Q (international cultural exchange visitors); and R (religious worker). Each of these visa categories requires a review of extensive documentation and a more in-depth interview of the applicant than other categories, such as tourists.

Q: Will this fee increase discourage people from traveling to the United States?

A: The proposed fees accurately reflect the processing costs incurred and regulations require full cost recovery through fees. Past increases in nonimmigrant visa fees did not negatively impact the number of applications received worldwide. The Department is aware that this fee increase may suppress the demand for nonimmigrant visas in some countries. However, the cost is still small compared to the cost of round-trip airfare from most countries to the United States. Most visas issued worldwide are tourist visas with a validity of ten years, meaning the bearer can visit the United States as often as he or she likes for ten years.

Q: Will other countries respond by increasing the visa fees they charge American citizens?

A: While some countries may increase visa fees, we expect many will not because, under the principle of reciprocity, we will be able to offset the nonimmigrant fees increase with a simultaneous reduction in reciprocity fees. For some countries, the combined total of nonimmigrant visa fees and reciprocal issuance fees will remain the same.

Q: How does this MRV processing fee differ from reciprocal issuance fees?

A: The MRV processing fee is paid by all visa applicants, worldwide, with certain limited exceptions, for example, those pertaining to government officials. It must be paid in advance, whether or not the visa is granted. The reciprocal issuance fee is an additional charge paid by visa applicants from certain countries in certain categories and is based on similar fees U.S. citizens are charged for visas to visit those countries. The reciprocity fee is charged only if the visa is granted.

CBP Announces Two New Ports Of Entry for Nonimmigrant Aliens Subject to Special Registration Requirements

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection has released a notice announcing the addition of two new ports of entry to the list of ports through which nonimmigrant aliens subject to special registration requirements may depart from the United States. The new ports-of-entry include Oakland International Airport, California and Saipan, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Special registration is required of nonimmigrant aliens whose presence in the United States requires closer monitoring.

Nonimmigrant aliens subject to special registration requirements may depart from the Oakland International Airport, California, effective November 25, 2009, and Saipan, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, effective November 28, 2009.

Certain nonimmigrant aliens, who apply for admission to the United States, are subject to special registration requirements. Upon arrival in the United States, they shall provide information required by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), such as information relating to their visa status, and they shall be fingerprinted and photographed.

Other special registration requirements include appearing at in-person verification or re-registration interviews at the discretion of DHS; providing notice to DHS of any change of address, residence, employment, or educational institution; and reporting departure from the United States to close their registration.

An alien who has been specially registered and has not yet departed the United States may seek relief from the departure control requirement for that admission by applying to the U.S.

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) field office director for the port from which the alien intends to depart. The alien must establish that exigent or unusual circumstances exist and that the alien warrants a favorable exercise of discretion.

This notice expands the August 8, 2006 listing by adding two POEs. Additional Ports-of-Entry Designated for Final Registration and Departure by Nonimmigrant Aliens Subject to Special Registration.

Effective November 25, 2009, Oakland International Airport, California, is designated as a POE authorized to provide final registration and departure by nonimmigrant aliens subject to special registration.

Effective November 28, 2009, Saipan, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, is designated as a POE authorized to provide final registration and departure by nonimmigrant aliens subject to special registration.

CBP Debuts Global Entry Program at Seattle Airport

U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the Port of Seattle today demonstrated a new clearance system for international air passengers at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. Global Entry uses a risk-based approach to facilitate the entry of pre-approved U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents of the U.S. and citizens of certain other countries. Global Entry now allows pre-screened, approved, registered travelers to receive expedited processing at Sea-Tac.

“Global Entry is a definite win-win for international travelers and for CBP,” said Michele James, director of the Seattle Field Office. “It provides pre-approved travelers an expedited clearance process and allows our CBP officers the ability to focus on processing other arriving passengers.”

Approved applicants present their machine-readable passport, submit their fingerprints for biometric verification, and make a declaration at the kiosk. Upon successful completion of the process at the kiosk, they are then directed to baggage claim and the exit, unless chosen for a selective or random secondary inspection.

To date, approximately 18,000 members have enrolled in the program. The Global Entry kiosks have been used more than 58,000 times at existing pilot locations. Global Entry reduces average wait times for CBP processing by 70 percent, with more than 75 percent of travelers using Global Entry processed in under five minutes.

The Global Entry process was piloted in 2008 at John F. Kennedy (JFK) International Airport, N.Y.; Washington Dulles International Airport, Dulles, Va.; and Houston Intercontinental Airport, Houston, Texas. Global Entry was later expanded to Miami, Atlanta, Los Angeles and Chicago. On August 24, CBP expanded the program to 13 additional international U.S. airports. Global Entry is now available at Detroit, Dallas, Newark, San Francisco, Boston, Orlando, Honolulu, Las Vegas, Orland-Sanford, Philadelphia, San Juan and Fort Lauderdale, as well as Sea-Tac.

US Visas for Nurses – Possible New W Visa

There is currently a huge shortage of nurses in the US; about 116,000 unfilled registered nurse vacancies at U.S. hospitals and nearly 100,000 nurse vacancies at Nursing homes.

On February 11, 2009, a new Nurse Relief Act was introduced in the House - HR 1001. This would introduce a new non-immigrant W visa category for nurses with an annual cap of 50,000.

Currently it is difficult for nurses to gain entry to the US:

Preference is given to nurses under the third preference employment based immigrant category (EB-3). Nurses and physiotherapists come under Schedule A and do not require labor certification. However, at the present time visas are unavailable under this category. We will have to wait until October to see if any more visas become available.
The H-3 non-immigrant visa allows temporary entry for the purposes of training in the US. You are expected to leave at the end of the training period.
In a limited number of cases where you are employing very senior level nurses the H-1B non-immigrant visa may be possible. However, this is difficult.
Similarly, in a limited number of cases it may be possible for nurses to gain entry under the J-1 exchange visitor scheme.

The Findings and Purpose of the Bill:

There are more vacant nursing positions in the United States than there are qualified registered nurses and nursing school candidates to fill those positions.
According to the Department of Labor, the current national nursing shortage exceeds 126,000.
States in the West and Southwest have a disproportionate number of nursing vacancies because of rapid population growth, which exacerbates a widening gap in the number of facilities and staff compared to patients that need care.
Foreign countries such as the Philippines, India, and China have an oversupply of nurses.
Major hospital systems in the United States spend hundreds of millions of dollars every year recruiting foreign nurses under our current immigration system.
Current law, with certain limited exceptions, requires health care providers to sponsor desired nurses for permanent resident status while the nurses remain outside of the United States, which can take as much as 3 years or more.
This cost is passed on to consumers and adds to the rising cost of health care.
Health care providers cannot efficiently and effectively recruit qualified foreign nurses through the existing immigration process.
Our health care system requires an immediate modification of Federal laws relating to recruitment of qualified foreign nurses in order to operate at an efficient and effective level.

US President Barack Obama wants to train more nurses locally to deal with the shortage of nurses. However, it takes years to train nurses. Even if more nurses are trained in the US it is unlikely that this will provide all the nurses needed in the US. The only way forward is to allow in nurses from Countries such as India, china and the Philippines. On 6 March 2009 Obama made the following comments:

"The notion that we would have to import nurses makes absolutely no sense," Obama told a gathering of health experts and lawmakers at a White House meeting on health care reforms.

"For people who get fired up about the immigration debate and yet don't notice that we could be training nurses right here in the United States," he said responding to Congresswoman Lois Capps from California.

"We have a huge shortage of nurses today. Estimates are that the US will be lacking over 500,000 nurses in the next seven years," said Capps.

"That's something that we've got to fix. That should be a no-brainer. That should be a bipartisan no-brainer, to make sure that we've got the best possible nursing staffs in the country," Obama said.

CBP to Start SENTRI Program at San Luis Port of Entry

Travelers wanting to participate in U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s trusted traveler program in the San Luis area will soon have the opportunity to participate in the Secure Electronic Network for Travelers Rapid Inspection(SENTRI) program.

CBP will open a local enrollment center in the fall of 2009, followed by dedicated commuter lanes at the San Luis port of entry in late 2009. Travelers interested in participating in the program are encouraged to apply early for the new SENTRI program.

Because the application process takes approximately six to eight weeks to complete, interested travelers are urged to apply now to be prepared for the opening of the enrollment center and so they will have their document when the lane opens. The program membership fee is $122.25 and will give members access to the dedicated vehicle lanes for five years.

SENTRI provides expedited travel to approved members between the US and Mexico border using dedicated vehicle or pedestrian lanes. Applicants must voluntarily undergo a thorough biographical background check against criminal, law enforcement, customs, immigration, and terrorist indices; a 10-fingerprint law enforcement check and a personal interview with a CBP Officer.

In addition to the quick crossings associated with SENTRI membership, program members will receive an enhanced Radio Frequency Identification card that meets the requirements of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative for approved-travel documents for U.S. citizens who cross the border by land or sea, which went into effect June 1. The SENTRI card can be used at any land border crossing in lieu of a passport or passport card.

The SENTRI program was first implemented at Otay Mesa, Calif., in 1995, and has grown to include 16 lanes at the nine largest ports on entry along the U.S.-Mexico border including San Ysidro, Calif.; Calexico, Calif.; Nogales, Ariz.; two crossings in El Paso, Texas; Laredo, Texas; Hidalgo, Texas; and Brownsville, Texas. More than 180,000 travelers from both sides of the border currently are enrolled in the program.

ICE Supplemental Fact Sheet on the Cap-Gap Extension

This supplemental guidance addresses two significant areas related to the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System’s (SEVIS) functionality and interface with other government systems, provides guidance on this issue and describes current workarounds, where available.

This guidance applies only to 2009. The cap gap is determined on an annual basis by demand for H-1B workers.

If you have any questions concerning the cap-gap extension or other SEVP guidance issues that are not covered in this supplemental guidance, please contact SEVP via e-mail at sevis.source@dhs.gov. Enter the words, Attention Policy: Gap Gap, in the subject line.

Cap-Gap Extension Functionality

Normally when U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) enters H-1B petition information into CLAIMS, the information is pushed into SEVIS where student records automatically update with the full cap-gap extension. If time constraints do not allow the process to complete, a designated school official (DSO) can employ the Cap-Gap Extension functionality in SEVIS.

The Cap-Gap Extension functionality was developed to allow DSOs to provide interim cap-gap extensions for students whose optional practical training (OPT) or status ends before USCIS has the opportunity to receive the H-1B petition and enter it into CLAIMS.

SEVIS now allows DSOs to indicate that an F-1 student is the beneficiary of an H-1B petition with a change of status request that has either been:

Filed and accepted for processing by USCIS; or
Supplemental Guidance on the Cap-Gap Extension 2
Filed and waitlisted by USCIS.

The Cap-Gap Extension functionality should not be used for all students who are eligible for the cap-gap extension. Rather, it should only be used in cases where a student’s status or OPT may end before USCIS can receipt the H-1B petition.

For example: if a student’s OPT ends on April 15 (approximately two weeks after the student’s employer filed the H-1B petition on his or her behalf), there is a chance that USCIS will not be able to receipt the H-1B petition by April 15. Because the student’s employment could end before his or her SEVIS record is updated with the full cap-gap extension, it would be appropriate for the student’s DSO to use the Cap-Gap Extension function to provide an initial cap-gap extension through June 2.

When a DSO selects Cap Gap Extension “filed,” a student’s OPT (or status if the student isn’t eligible for OPT during the cap gap) is extended to June 2. For students whose OPT ends before June 2, this is the appropriate action.

However, we have received reports of DSOs using this function for all students who are eligible for the cap gap. This is not appropriate and creates problems in SEVIS and for the students. If a student’s OPT ends after June 2 and the DSO uses the “filed” function, the employment end date is changed to June 2. The DSO then has to contact the Help Desk to get the employment end date returned to the correct date.

Inappropriate Termination/Completion of SEVIS Records

SEVP has received a number of reports stating that SEVIS records are being inappropriately terminated or completed when students are eligible for the cap-gap extension. This is happening due to USCIS interface issues.

USCIS adjudicators enter petition information into a database which interfaces with CLAIMS Mainframe. There is a glitch in the interface between those databases that can prevent petition information, including benefit dates, from reaching the CLAIMS Mainframe. When this happens, CLAIMS Mainframe does not have any benefit dates to send to SEVIS. Consequently, SEVIS sees the change of status but does not have a benefit start date. This leads SEVIS to believe the change of status takes effect immediately and causes a student’s record to terminate or complete when it should be updated with the cap-gap extension. USCIS is aware of the issue and is investigating in order to identify the problem and resolve it.

Until the issue is resolved, SEVP has a workaround in place. If a student’s record is inappropriately terminated or completed due to an H-1B petition filed on a student’s behalf, we request that DSOs contact the SEVIS Help Desk to have the record returned to Active status and add the cap-gap extension.

DOJ Provides Dos and Don’ts for Employers On E-Verify

In order to provide guidance to employers regarding E-Verify, the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices in Department of Justice (DOJ) has published a pamphlet containing “Dos and Don’ts.”

The pamphlet clearly says that employers should use E-Verify to verify employment eligibility of new hires and not for current employees. Further, employers may allow an employee who has not been issued a Social Security number to work throughout the period that the employee is waiting for his or her Social Security number (SSN) to be issued. There are other aspects that are illustrated in the pamphlets, readers and employers are advised to go through the same thoroughly to stay informed.

DO...

Use program to verify employment eligibility of new hires
Use program for all new employees regardless of national origin or citizenship status
Use program for new employees after they have completed the Form I-9
Promptly provide and review with the employee the notice of tentative non-confirmation
Promptly provide the referral notice from the Social Security Administration (SSA) or Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to the employee who chooses to contest a tentative non-confirmation
Allow an employee who is contesting a tentative non-confirmation to continue to work during that period
Check E-Verify daily for updates in connection with the tentative non-confirmation
Contact E-Verify if you believe an employee has received a final non-confirmation in error
Post required notices of the employer’s participation in E-Verify and the antidiscrimination notice issued by the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC)
Accept any Form I-9 List B document with a photo from an employee who chooses to provide a List B document
Secure the privacy of employees’ personal information and the password used for access to the program
Delay running an E-Verify query for an employee who has not yet been issued a Social Security number until the Social Security number is issued
Allow an employee who has not been issued a Social Security number to work throughout the period that the employee is waiting for his or her Social Security number to be issued

DON’T...

Use program to verify current employees
Use program selectively based on a “suspicion” that a new employee or current employee may not be authorized to work in the U.S. or based on national origin
Use program to pre-screen employment applicants unless you are a State Workforce Agency
Influence or coerce an employee’s decision whether to contest a tentative non-confirmation
Terminate or take adverse action against an employee who is contesting a tentative non-confirmation, including denying or reducing scheduled hours, delaying or preventing training, mistreating the employee, requiring the employee to work longer hours, requiring the employee to work in poorer conditions, or subjecting the employee to any assumption that s/he is unauthorized to work during this period, unless and until receiving a final non-confirmation or no show response
Ask an employee to obtain a printout or other written verification from SSA or DHS when referring that employee to either agency
Ask an employee to provide additional documentation of his or her employment eligibility after obtaining a tentative non-confirmation for that employee
Request specific documents in order to activate E-Verify’s photo tool feature
Run an E-Verify query for an employee who is waiting for his or her Social Security number to be issued until the employee is issued a Social Security number

CBP Released Tips for US-Canadian Border Travelers During the Summer Holidays

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) reminds both Americans and Canadians planning their holiday travel for Canada Day, Fourth of July and summer vacation season that there are a number of steps they can employ to cross the border more efficiently.

The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative was implemented on June 1 and requires U.S. and Canadian citizens age 16 and older to present a valid, acceptable document that denotes both identity and citizenship when entering the U.S. by land or sea. WHTI acceptable documents include a passport, U.S. passport card, enhanced driver’s licenses -- now produced by the State of Washington and Province of British Columbia -- or a Trusted Traveler Program card (NEXUS, SENTRI and FAST).

CBP also wants to remind U.S. lawful permanent residents that the Form I-551 (green card) is acceptable for land and sea travel into the U.S.

"The United States remain a welcoming nation for our neighbors to the north, however the holidays and summer weekends will require additional planning and patience on the part of travelers,” said Michele James, CBP director of Field Operations-Seattle.

Here are a few ‘Travel Tips’ that will assist travelers crossing the international border:

Tip #1 – Travelers should familiarize themselves with the “Know Before You Go” section of the CBP Web site to avoid fines and penalties associated with the importation of prohibited items.

Tip #2 – Travelers should prepare for the inspection process before arriving at the inspection booth. Individuals should have their crossing documents available for the inspection and they should be prepared to declare all items acquired abroad. In addition, individuals should end cellular phone conversations before arriving at the inspection booth.

Tip #3 – Members of the traveling public should consult the CBP Web site to monitor border wait times for various ports of entry including Blaine and Sumas, Wash.; Sweetgrass, Mont.; and Pembina, N.D. Information is updated hourly and is useful in planning trips and identifying periods of light use/short waits.

Tip #4 – During periods of heavy travel, border crossers may wish to consider alternative, less heavily traveled entry routes.

Tip #5 – Travelers should plan to build extra time into their trips in the event they cross during periods of exceptionally heavy traffic (i.e. Canada Day and the Fourth of July holidays and adjacent weekends).

Tip #6 – Know the difference between goods for personal use vs. commercial use.

Tip #7 – Do not attempt to bring fruits, meats, dairy/poultry products and firewood into the United States from Canada without first checking whether they are permitted.

Tip #8 – Understand that CBP officers have the authority to conduct enforcement examinations without a warrant, ranging from a single luggage examination up to and possibly including a personal search. Even during the summer vacation season, international border crossers should continue to expect a thorough inspection process when they enter the U.S. from Canada.

CBP officials continually monitor traffic and border crossing times at area ports of entry. They plan to fully staff all inspection lanes during peak periods and to implement various traffic management operations to maintain the flow of traffic during periods of exceptionally heavy usage.

CBP Reminds Travelers of New Border-Crossing Document Requirements

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) reminds United States and Canadian citizens that new travel document requirements go into effect on June 1 for entry into United States at land or sea ports. Travelers should apply for approved travel documents now, as it can take several weeks to receive a document that will comply with new requirements under the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative.

CBP is committed to working with travelers to ensure they have access to and can obtain appropriate travel documents. U.S. and Canadian citizens who lack WHTI-compliant documents but are otherwise admissible will not be denied entry into the United States on June 1, and are encouraged to continue with their travel plans and to obtain facilitative and secure WHTI travel documents as soon as possible.

WHTI-compliant documents for entry into the United States at land and sea ports include:

U.S. or Canadian passports;

Trusted Traveler Card (NEXUS, SENTRI, or FAST/EXPRES);

U.S. Passport Card;

State or province-issued Enhanced Driver’s Licenses (when and where available). For more information please visit the WHTI Web site.(GetYouHome.gov)

“Obtaining a WHTI-approved document and complying with the law will help make our borders more secure,” said CBP Acting Commissioner Jayson P. Ahern. “We will be practical and flexible in implementing this new travel requirement, but encourage travelers to get these documents now to expedite border crossings from day one.”

U.S. and Canadian citizen children under age 16 arriving by land or sea from Canada, Mexico or the Caribbean need only present proof of citizenship, such as an original or copy of his or her birth certificate, a consular report of birth abroad, a naturalization certificate, or a Canadian citizenship card.

Document requirements for lawful permanent residents of the United States do not change under WHTI. Lawful permanent residents should continue to present their Permanent Resident Card (I-551).

The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative is the joint Department of Homeland Security-Department of State program that implements a key 9/11 Commission recommendation and Congressional mandate to establish document requirements for travelers entering the United States who were previously exempt, including citizens of the U.S., Canada and Bermuda. WHTI document requirements for air travel went into effect in 2007.

CAPAC’s Letter to President Obama Urging to Enact Comprehensive Immigration Reform

March 17, 2009
President Barack Obama
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear President Obama

On behalf ofthe Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC), we urge you to enact just and humane comprehensive immigration reform this year that will reunite and prevent the separation of families, secure our nation, and restore our economy.

An estimated 1.5 million Asians constitute over 10 percent of the undocumented population in the United States, and 2 million, or approximately half, ofthose waiting in family immigration backlogs are Asian. Immigration raids tear families apart, dreams of undocumented students are suspended indefinitely, and growing immigration backlogs keep close family members separated for years, sometimes decades.

CAPAC is also committed to working with you to address concerns regarding past actions of the Department ofHomeland Security. In particular, we are concerned about the treatment of detainees, due process rights, federal-local immigration enforcement agreements, and raids in worksites and immigrant communities.

Members of CAPAC are encouraged by your leadership and statements on this issue during your campaign and in the early weeks of your Administration. We particularly appreciate the immigration proposals you presented in the Blueprint for the Change We Need for Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders during your campaign.

Immigration reform must remain an early priority in your Administration. We commend your commitment to this issue, and look forward to working with you in the coming weeks. Our nation urgently needs an effective and working immigration system that reflects the best ofAmerica's values.

Sincerely,
Michael M. Honda
Chair
Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus

Obama to sign $410 billion omnibus for 2009

President Barack Obama is expected today to sign the $410 billion 2009 omnibus bill, funding the government through Sept. 30. Obama is expected to sign the bill this afternoon, hours before the continuing resolution is set to expire at midnight.

Federal agencies, except the departments of Defense, Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs, have been operating under a continuing resolution since Oct. 1, the start of the 2009 fiscal year.

The nine appropriations bills bundled together in the omnibus bill had stalled last year in Congress because of a veto threat from President George W. Bush. Democrats opted instead to pass the bills after President Barack Obama was sworn into office.

The House passed the omnibus two weeks ago. The Senate passed the bill yesterday despite flak from many Republicans who complained the omnibus contained more than 9,000 wasteful earmarks.

Obama expressed his disappointment about the earmarks in the bill but said he plans to sign it because it is needed to fund the government and make needed investments in infrastructure. He stressed that earmarks are a tiny part of the bill, and he used the bill as an opportunity to press for earmark reform.

Obama said earmark money should be held to the same competitive bidding requirements as federal contracts.

Vermont Service Center (VSC) Preparing for H-1B Cap Petitions

At the Vermont Service Center (VSC) liaison meeting on March 2, 2009, VSC advised that they will continue to send weekly shipments of I-751 petitions to the CSC through the end of March. VSC noted that to date, they have sent approximately 50,000 I-751s to California Service Center (CSC). VSC is also continuing to ship I-539s to CSC, which have so far included approximately 14,000 I-539s.

In addition, VSC noted it recently shipped approximately 3000 H-1B extension petitions to CSC in March 2009. While these are cases that were properly filed at VSC, CSC has more capacity to work on these cases at present.

VSC confirmed that all cap-exempt employer cases, INCLUDING EXTENSIONS, should be filed at California Service Centre (CSC). Petitions mistakenly filed with the VSC will be rejected.

In this instance, "cap exempt" refers only to those petitioners who are exempt from the numerical limitations identified in 8 CFR 214.2(h)(8)(A). "Cap exempt" petitioners include:

Institutions of higher education, as defined in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, 20 U.S.C. 1001(a);
Nonprofit organizations or entities related to or affiliated with institutions of higher education; and
Nonprofit research organizations or governmental research organizations, as defined in 8 CFR 214.2(h)(19).

Petitioners can indicate their cap exempt status on the I-129 form with a "yes" answer to questions 1, 2, or 3 in Part C of the H-1B Data Collection and Filing Fee Exemption Supplement (page 10).

President Obama Signs the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

Today President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (H.R.1), which includes $4 billion in Department of Justice (DOJ) grant funding to enhance state, local, and tribal law enforcement efforts, including the hiring of new police officers, to combat violence against women, and to fight internet crimes against children, the Department of Justice announced.

“This funding is vital to keeping our communities strong,” said Attorney General Eric Holder. “As governors, mayors, and local law enforcement professionals struggle with the current economic crisis, we can’t afford to decrease our commitment to fighting crime and keeping our communities safe. These grants will help ensure states and localities can make the concerted efforts necessary to protect our most vulnerable communities and populations.”

Specific Department of Justice (DOJ) investments in the Act include:

$1 billion to fund local police officers through Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program. These grants will fund an estimated 5,500 local police officers through the COPS Hiring Recovery Program.

$2 billion in the Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) program through the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) to fund grants for state and local programs that combat crime. The Byrne JAG program is distributed by formula – 60 percent to the states and 40 percent to the local law enforcement efforts.

Resources from the Office on Violence Against Women for programs that help our most vulnerable populations -- $225 million in Violence Against Women Act Grants. Also provides $100 million through OJP for grants to assist victims of crime, $225 million for tribal law enforcement assistance, and $50 million for the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Forces.

Provides an additional $390 million from OJP for local law enforcement assistance, including $225 million in competitive Byrne grants, $125 million targeted for rural areas, and $40 million for the Southern border (including $10 million for ATF’s Project Gunrunner).

The Act also includes funds for the administration of the Department’s Recovery Act grants and associated oversight and accountability.

Limits on H-1B Hiring By Bailout Recipients Still In Economic Stimulus Bill

A provision intended to require banks receiving federal bailout funds to give hiring priority to U.S. workers over foreigners with H-1B visas was left in the economic stimulus package when U.S. House and Senate negotiators agreed on a compromise bill this week.

The stimulus bill, once it is approved by the Senate and signed by President Barack Obama, will require firms that take bailout funding to make a good-faith effort to hire U.S. citizens before people who are in the country on H-1B visas.

Opponents of the measure said it is so restrictive that affected financial services firms will likely stop hiring H-1B workers altogether. However, the provision doesn't prevent them from using offshore outsourcing contractors, which typically are heavy users of H-1B visas.

As a result of the conference agreement, Sanders said in a statement today that he expects the H-1B provisions to be adopted along with the rest of the stimulus bill. He added that what may have prompted the negotiators to keep the H-1B restrictions in the bill were all of the ongoing layoffs and other job losses. "With thousands of financial services workers unemployed, it is absurd for banks to claim they can't find qualified American workers," Sanders said.

The proposed restrictions require firms that receive money under the federal Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) to comply with hiring rules set for "H-1B dependent" firms — those with more than 15% of their workers on visas. Those rules set a number of strict requirements for hiring H-1B holders, including a need for companies to attest that they actively recruited American workers and are not displacing or replacing U.S. citizens with foreign workers.

While the H-1B hiring restrictions made it into the final version of the stimulus bill, the negotiators dropped a related provision that would have required businesses taking bailout money to use the federal government's E-Verify system to vet the employment status of their workers. Conferees also removed the provision that would have renewed the currently voluntary E-Verify program for an additional five years. E-Verify is currently set to expire in March 2009.

DOJ Announces Multi-State Arrest for Targeting Visa and Mail Fraud

Federal agents arrested 11 individuals in 6 states Wednesday as part of an investigation into suspected visa and mail fraud. Matthew G. Whitaker, United States Attorney for the Southern District of Iowa, announced the operation, which was carried out by federal, state and local law enforcement agencies in Iowa, California, Massachusetts, Texas, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and New Jersey.

VISION SYSTEMS GROUP, INC., a New Jersey Domestic Profit Corporation, with a branch office in Coon Rapids, Iowa, was also indicted in a ten count federal indictment that included one count of conspiracy, eight counts of mail fraud, and one count of ‘Notice of Forfeiture’ in the amount of $7,400,000.

“Today’s multi-state enforcement action is the result of an extensive, ongoing investigation into suspected H1B visa fraud, mail fraud, and conspiracy,” said U.S. Attorney Whitaker. “Dubbed Operation Pacific Vision, this investigation is the result of outstanding cooperation and collaboration among law enforcement agencies at all levels of government.”

The investigation is being conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in collaboration with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services - Fraud Detection and National Security Division (FDNS); U.S. Department of Labor - Office of Inspector General; U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS); U.S. Department of State; Social Security Administration - Office of The Inspector General, and is supported by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Iowa.

"This case highlights the Department of Homeland Security’s commitment to identifying and dismantling visa fraud schemes,” said Homeland Security Acting Assistant Secretary for ICE John P.Torres. "Ensuring the integrity of our nation's legal immigration system is a top priority for ICE."

"This is a prime example of how the Department of Homeland Security identifies fraud," said Michael Aytes, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Acting Deputy Director. "Our adjudication officers can spot inconsistencies during the application process that ultimately lead to the successful outcome we’re seeing today. Visa fraud undermines the integrity of the immigration system and I’m proud that our officers have helped to ensure that the American people and our customers can continue to depend on a reliable system."

Federal authorities, with assistance from state and local law enforcement, served search warrants at addresses in Urbandale and Clive, Iowa; in Santa Clara, Rancho Cucamonga and Arcadia, Calif.; and in South Plainfield, N.J.

This investigation involves companies that sponsor primarily H-1B non -immigrants, or temporary workers in specialty occupations that require particular expertise. The companies that are the subject of this investigation have asserted that the foreign workers have been brought to the U.S. to fill existing vacancies. However, the companies allegedly have not always had jobs available for these workers, thereby placing them in non-pay status after they arrive in the United States. In some cases, the foreign workers have allegedly been placed in jobs and locations not previously certified by the Department of Labor, displacing qualified American workers and violating prevailing wage laws. The companies and foreign workers have allegedly submitted false statements and documents in support of their visa petitions. The false statements and documents were mailed or wired to state and federal agencies in support of the visa applications. The companies are suspected of visa fraud, mail fraud, wire fraud, money laundering and conspiracy.

"The foreign labor certification programs are designed to permit U.S. employers to hire foreign workers to fill jobs essential to American businesses," said Daniel R. Petrole, Deputy Inspector General, United States Department of Labor. "Our agency remains resolute in its commitment with its law enforcement partners to investigate fraud committed against these Department of Labor programs."

U.S. businesses use the H-1B program to employ foreign workers in specialty occupations that require theoretical or technical expertise in specialized fields, such as scientists, engineers, or computer programmers. As part of the H-1B program, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Labor (DOL) require U.S. employers to meet specific labor conditions to ensure that American workers are not adversely impacted, while the DOL’s Wage and Hour Division safeguards the treatment and compensation of H-1B workers. Congress sets a numerical cap for the admission of skilled workers into the U.S. The current H-1B cap is set at 65,000 per fiscal year. H-1B aliens can work in the United States for three years, with an option for an additional three years (for a maximum of six years).

Shiva NEELI, Arrested in Boston, MA
Count 1: Conspiracy
Counts 2-3 Mail Fraud

Ramakrishna MAGULURI, Arrested in Atlanta, GA
Count 1: Conspiracy
Count 2: Mail Fraud

Villiappan SUBBAIAH, Arrested in Dallas, TX
Count 1: Conspiracy
Counts 2 - 3: Mail Fraud

Suresh POLA, Arrested in Pennsylvania (SAC PHI)
Count 1: Conspiracy
Count 2: Mail Fraud

Vishnu REDDY, Arrested in Los Angeles, CA
Count 1: Conspiracy
Counts 2 - 6: Mail Fraud
Counts 13 - 16: Wire Fraud

Chockalingam PALANIAPPAN, Arrested in San Jose, CA
Count 1: Conspiracy
Counts 2 - 6: Mail Fraud
Counts 13 - 16: Wire Fraud

Vijay MYNENI, Arrested in San Jose, CA
Count 1: Conspiracy
Counts 2 - 4: Mail Fraud

Venkata GUDURU, Arrested in New Jersey
Count 1: Conspiracy
Count 2: Mail Fraud

Praveen ANDAPALLY, Arrested in New Jersey
Count 1: Conspiracy
Counts 2 - 7: Mail Fraud
Counts 8 - 10: Wire Fraud
Counts 11 - 12: False Statement in Immigration Matter

Amit JUSTA, Arrested in New Jersey
Count 1: Conspiracy
Count 2: Mail Fraud

Karambir YADAV, Arrested in Louisville, KY
Count 1: Conspiracy
Counts 2 - 4: Mail Fraud

The Department of Homeland Security has a multifaceted approach to detecting and investigating immigration and benefit fraud. ICE’s Document and Benefit Fraud Task Forces were created in March 2006 to target and dismantle criminal organizations that threaten national security and public safety and close vulnerabilities in the immigration process. U.S. Citizenship and Immigrations Services created the Fraud Detection and National Security Division (FDNS) to enhance the integrity of the immigration systems and to identify persons who pose a threat to national security or public safety. Cooperation between FDNS and ICE has helped to increase the incidence of enforcement actions.

The following agencies investigated or assisted in this case: U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Iowa; U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services - Fraud Detection and National Security Division; U.S. Department of Labor - Office of Inspector General; U.S. Postal Inspection Service; U.S. Department of State, Kentucky Consular Center (a field office of the Bureau of Consular Affairs); U.S. Marshals Service; Social Security Administration - Office of Inspector General; Internal Revenue Service - Criminal Investigations; Des Moines Police Department; West Des Moines Police Department; Iowa Department of Transportation - Motor Vehicle Enforcement Office.

The maximum sentences for the above charges are:

Conspiracy: 5 Years in Prison and a $250,000 fine
Mail Fraud: 20 Years in Prison and a $250,000 fine
Wire Fraud 20 Years in Prison and a $250,000 fine
False Statement in Immigration Matter: 10 Years in Prison and a $250,000 fine

As with any criminal case, a charge is merely an accusation; a defendant is presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty.

Because this investigation is in its early stages, it would be inappropriate to provide further details on the case at this time. As this is an open federal investigation, until further notice, the media is asked to direct any inquires on Operation Pacific Vision to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Iowa’s Public Information Officer, Mike Bladel at (515) 473-9342. No other agency is authorized to respond to questions on this matter.

CBP Buffalo Field Office Announces First Quarter Accomplishments for Fiscal Year 2009

Enforcement results from Customs and Border Protection’s Buffalo Field Office reflect significant results in our efforts to protect our Nation’s Borders during the first quarter of fiscal year 2009.

James T. Engleman, director of field operations for the Buffalo Field Office said that, during this time frame, CBP officers processed approximately 4.9 million passengers, 1.9 million autos, 345,000 commercial trucks and 10,800 commercial buses. The Buffalo Field Office encompasses all 17 international land border crossings in the State of New York, from Buffalo to Champlain and Rouses Point.

CBP officers arrested 47 fugitives wanted for crimes including aggravated attempted murder, racketeering, conspiracy and organized fraud. Our apprehensions included the arrest of an individual wanted by INTERPOL in Pakistan and one arrested on child pornography charges.

CBP’s Buffalo Field Office reported the following accomplishments for the first quarter of FY 09, which started on October 1, 2008 and ended December 31, 2008:

CBP officers prevented approximately 1,100 criminal aliens from entering the United States. Foreign nationals are considered criminal aliens if they have been convicted of committing crimes involving moral turpitude.
Nine fraudulent documents were seized.
22 travelers were intercepted while making a false claim to United States citizenship.
CBP officers prevented the entry of five foreign nationals who were identified as potential threats to national security.
CBP officers arrested 27 people who attempted to smuggle contraband into the United States.
CBP officers seized more than 350 pounds of hydroponic marijuana and 22 pounds of ecstasy were seized. The combined narcotics seized have an estimated street value of $1.7 million.
CBP officers also seized over $700,000 of undeclared currency entering the U.S., nearly surpassing the $730,000 seized throughout all of fiscal year 2008. Officers also seized $113,000 in undeclared currency exiting the U.S.
CBP agriculture specialists made more than 455 pest interceptions and issued 25 penalties for smuggling attempts.
In one case in November 2008, CBP officers seized eleven endangered Asian arowana fish that were found concealed in a speaker box located in the trunk of the vehicle. The Asian arowana fish are covered under the Endangered Species Act in the United States and cannot be possessed without a permit.

Locally, Buffalo Port Director Joseph J. Wilson said that the Service Port of Buffalo, comprised of the Peace Bridge, Rainbow Bridge, Whirlpool Bridge and Lewiston Bridge, processed more than 1.2 million vehicles, more than 220,000 commercial trucks and 3.3 million passengers. CBP officer interdictions of narcotics smuggling attempts continues to increase, with CBP officers in Buffalo seizing more than 33,000 tablets of ecstasy in the first quarter of FY 09. Officers also seized $615,000 in unreported currency and arrested 36 wanted fugitives.

Alexandria Bay Port Director Alan Whitcomb noted that during the first quarter of FY 09 the Area Port of Alexandria Bay, which also includes the Massena and Ogdensburg border crossings, processed 436,000 passenger vehicles, 63,000 commercial trucks and nearly 1 million passengers. Officers also seized more than 230 pounds of hydroponic marijuana with a street value of nearly $700,000, seized approximately $70,000 in undeclared currency and arrested seven fugitives.

Acting Champlain Port Director Steven Bronson said that the Service Port of Champlain, which includes the 10 border crossings from Ft. Covington to Rouses Point, processed 244,000 vehicles, 84,000 commercial vehicles and 700,000 passengers. Officers also seized more than 23 pounds of ecstasy with a street value of nearly $625,000, approximately $133,780 in undeclared currency, and arrested seven wanted fugitives.

The final stages of the new Champlain port of entry construction project is nearing completion, with the majority of the work being completed in FY 08. This includes the reconstruction of the passenger processing facility, where both passenger vehicles and buses are processed. Completion of the construction project is slated for March 2009.

One of many significant seizures involved the smuggling of liquid Ketemine declared as “Holy Water.” CBP officers encountered a 50-year-old a lawful permanent resident of the United States at the Lewiston-Queenston Bridge border crossing in Lewiston, N.Y. The subject declared 100 bottles of holy water, 42 of which later were determined to be the date rape drug Ketemine. This unique seizure made CBP’s list of Top 10 Enforcement Events of 2008.

In November 2008, CBP completed the deployment of vicinity Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology at all border crossings within the Port of Buffalo. The technology was installed in preparation for the full implementation of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI), slated for June of 2009. WHTI is a part of the plan to implement the statutory mandates of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (IRTPA) of 2004 and a 9/11 Commission recommendation, which requires U.S. and Canadian citizens to present secure documentation that confirms identity and citizenship when entering or re-entering the United States from within the Western Hemisphere.

CBP Publishes Revised Information Collection on Form I-94 and I-94W

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) of the Department of Homeland Security has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act concerning the Form I-94 (Arrival/Departure Record), the Form I-94W (Nonimmigrant Visa Waiver Arrival/Departure), and the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA). This is an extension (with change) of an existing collection of information. This document is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register (73 FR 75730) on December 12, 2008, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments.

This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10.

DATES: Written comments should be received on or before March 16, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to Nathan Lesser, Desk Officer, Department of Homeland Security/Customs and Border Protection, and sent via electronic mail to oira_submission@omb.eop.gov or faxed to (202) 395-6974.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) encourages the general public and affected Federal agencies to submit written comments and suggestions on proposed and/or continuing information collection requests pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13). Your comments should address one of the following four points:

Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency/ component, including whether the information will have practical utility;

Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies/components estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Title: Arrival and Departure Record, Nonimmigrant Visa Waiver Arrival/Departure, the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA).

OMB Number: 1651-0111.

Form Numbers: I-94 and I-94W.

Abstract: Form I-94 (Arrival/Departure Record) and Form I-94W (Nonimmigrant Visa Waiver Arrival/Departure Record) are used to document a traveler's admission into the United States. These forms include date of arrival, visa classification and the date the authorized stay expires. The forms are also used by business employers and other organizations to confirm legal status in the United States. The Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) applies to aliens traveling to the United States under the Visa Waiver Program (VWP) and requires that VWP travelers provide information electronically to CBP before embarking on travel to the United States. The recent expansion of the VWP to include seven additional countries resulted in a change to the burden hours of this collection of information.

Current Actions: This submission is being made to extend the expiration date.

Type of Review: Extension (with change).

Affected Public: Individuals.
Estimated Number of Respondents (I-94 and I-94W): 30,924,380.
Estimated Number of Respondents (ESTA): 18,000,000.
Estimated Time per Response (I-94 and I-94W): 8 minutes.
Estimated Time per Response (ESTA): 15 minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 8,623,249.
Estimated Total Annualized Cost on the Public: $185,546,280.

Senate Bill Would Bar H-1B Hiring at Firms Receiving Bailout Money

Financial services firms that receive federal bailout money will be prohibited from hiring H-1B workers if legislation introduced in the U.S. Senate wins adoption.

The bill would bar any recipient of the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP), the program being used by the government to purchase some $700 billion of bad mortgage assets, from hiring anyone on an H-1B visa. U.S. Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) introduced the proposal as an amendment to the massive, $800 billion-plus federal stimulus bill, which is separate from the previously approved bank rescue funds.

"I firmly believe that companies going through layoffs that employ H-1B visas (holding workers) have a moral obligation to protect American workers by putting them first during these difficult times," said Sanders, according to an unofficial transcript of his remarks on the Senate floor.

The argument that Sanders raised for including the restriction in the TARP funding is similar to one that Grassley made to Microsoft Corp. in his recent letter to CEO Steve Ballmer. After the company announced plans to cut 5,000 jobs, Grassley told Microsoft that it had a "moral obligation" to give job priority to U.S. workers over foreigners with H-1B visas.

It's unclear what impact this legislation will have if adopted. Financial services firms hire H-1B workers directly, but most of their use of visa-holding workers may be through outsourcing contracts with overseas vendors, an issue not addressed in this legislation.

The Associated Press released the results of an investigation this week that found that a dozen banks receiving bailout funds totaling $150 billion requested 21,800 H-1B visas over the last six years. Those H-1B visas were applied for by the banks, and not the visas used by the service providers.

Indian offshore outsourcing firms attribute as much as 40% of their revenues from the financial services sector. Offshore companies use workers on H-1B visas to deliver services in the U.S., which may also include transferring some of the work overseas.

Moreover, many financial services have built their own centers in India and elsewhere for IT work and business process services, such as call centers.

Limitations on H-1B Hiring:

An amendment proposed by Senators Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Charles Grassley (R-IA) would limit the ability of employers receiving TARP funding or certain Federal Reserve loans to hire H-1B workers for a period of two years. The amendment, which passed by voice vote would not preclude H-1B hiring, but would impose additional obligations on affected employers.

As per the amendment, affected employers would be required to attest that they took good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers for the job for which an H-1B nonimmigrant is sought and that the job was offered to any U.S. worker who applied and who was equally or better qualified than the H-1B nonimmigrant. Affected employers would also be required to attest that the H-1B worker did not displace a U.S. worker in an essentially equivalent job during a period starting 90 days before the filing of an H-1B petition and ending 90 days after an H-1B petition was filed. This would include displacement at the employer's worksite and at any outside worksite where the employer has placed an H-1B worker. Under current law, these attestations are required only of employers whose workforce contains a large percentage of H-1B workers (known as "H-1B dependent" employers).

CIS Ombudsman Releases Q & As on EB-5 Investor Visas

The following are comments and questions from the teleconference and the answers from USCIS.

Possible Sunset of Regional Center Program

Ombudsman Response :

Premium Processing

Currently Active Designated Regional Centers

Ombudsman Response

Minimum Threshold Investment Amount

Ombudsman Response

Targeted High Unemployment Area

Ombudsman Response

Special Public Law Legislation Cases

Ombudsman Response

Regular Stakeholder Meetings

Ombudsman Response

Job Creation

Ombudsman Response

Overlapping Regional Centers

Ombudsman Response

Number of Adjudicators

Ombudsman Response

Towards the end of the teleconference, the USCIS Deputy Service Center Operations Director shared the following information

USCIS is committed to conducting quarterly EB-5 stakeholder meetings.
Ten adjudicators will be assigned for California Service Center EB-5 processing, as volume demands.
USCIS will look into the recent complaint of I-829 receipt notice delays or non-issuance.
One caller asked how to obtain a determination that an area qualifies as a "targeted unemployment area" enabling an EB-5 investor to qualify based on the reduced $500,000 threshold. USCIS indicated that the investor should contact the governor's office, which routinely works with the designated state agency designated by the governor for that purpose.
Finally, USCIS will address non-case specific EB-5 questions at its dedicated email address: USCIS.ImmigrantInvestorProgram@dhs.gov

Obama’s Immigration Policy May Benefit Indians

The new Obama administration in the US proposed immigration policy favoring an increase in the number of legal immigrants, which may benefit Indians, as many of the legal immigrants in the US are Indians.

"Fix the dysfunctional immigration bureaucracy and increase the number of legal immigrants to keep families together and meet the demand for jobs that employers cannot fill," according to the White House document that details immigration policy for the new administration.

"Our broken immigration system can only be fixed by putting politics aside and offering a complete solution that secures our border, enforces our laws, and reaffirms our heritage as a nation of immigrants," says Obama.

The agenda document also makes it clear that tougher action will be taken against employers who hire undocumented immigrants.

The Obama Administration supports a policy that will give undocumented immigrants a route to Citizenship. Undocumented immigrants in good standing will need to have good English and eventually be in a position to apply for US citizenship.

Previously as an US Senator Obama said in the Senate on May 23, 2007: "The time to fix our broken immigration system is now... We need stronger enforcement on the border and at the workplace.

"But for reform to work, we also must respond to what pulls people to America... Where we can reunite families, we should. Where we can bring in more foreign-born workers with the skills our economy needs, we should."

CBP to Deactivate Older SENTRI Frequent Traveler Cards

U.S. Customs and Border Protection today announced that it will cancel old Secure Electronic Network for Travelers Rapid Inspection cards for current SENTRI members on January 26.

CBP has been mailing new SENTRI cards to all members since July. The new cards have enhanced security features and allow U.S. citizen cardholders to comply with the documentary requirements of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative.

All members must activate their new cards within 30 days, verify and update their contact information and register or update their current license plate by accessing the Global Online Enrollment System on the CBP Web site.

SENTRI members should destroy their old cards after activating their new ones. If members have not received their new cards, they should go to their local enrollment center to either pick up their new card or have a new card issued. Old cards will be deactivated January 26.

SENTRI is a land-border crossing program that provides expedited CBP processing for pre-approved, low-risk travelers along the U.S./Mexico border.

The SENTRI program was first implemented at Otay Mesa, Calif. in 1995, and has grown to include 16 lanes at the nine largest ports of entry along the U.S.-Mexico border including San Ysidro, and Calexico in California, Nogales, Ariz.; two crossings in El Paso, Texas; and the Texas ports of Laredo, Hidalgo and Brownsville. More than 175,000 travelers from both sides of the border currently are registered in the SENTRI program.

A similar program called Nexus serves citizens of the U.S. and Canada on the northern border.

New Mailing Address Format for USCIS National Capitol Region Offices

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today a new address format for offices within the National Capital Region (NCR), affecting all USCIS headquarters offices, the Arlington Asylum Office, and the Washington District Office.

In order to ensure the timely delivery of USCIS mail, correspondence addressed to the affected offices should list a unique mailstop and corresponding ZIP code + 4 number. The mail will be delivered to each office according to the mailstop and ZIP code + 4 number provided. If the address does not list a mailstop and corresponding ZIP code + 4 number, the correspondence will still be delivered but may be subject to minor delays as a result of the new mail process. For example, the new format for the Information and Customer Service Division, which handles all general inquiries, is:

Information and Customer Service Division MS 2260
U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services
111 Massachusetts Ave. N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20529-2260

This address format change does not apply to USCIS offices outside the National Capitol Region (such as the Baltimore District). It also currently does not apply to the Alexandria Application Support Center.

Renewed Hope for US Retirement Visa

Estate agents in the United States hope that the impending change of government will help to generate renewed enthusiasm for the 'Silver Card', a retirement visa, which would allow foreigners to spend their retirement in the U.S.

Whilst close neighbors such as Mexico, Panama, Costa Rica, and Belize have a variety of programmes designed to encourage international pensioners to settle and buy homes there, the U.S. offers no simple path for a foreign citizen to retire to destinations such as Florida or California.

He went on to say that 'Although details still need to be hashed out, a retirement visa would allow foreign citizens of a certain age with a steady pension fund income and a few other verifiable requirements to retire in the US without hassle.' In his opinion 'this is not an immigration proposal, it's an economic proposal.'

'If this was in place by now, a lot of inventory would be absorbed and prices would be strengthened because we would have an active market,' claimed Macaluso.

A recent study commissioned by NAR found that 7.5 percent of foreign citizens polled expressed an interest in retiring to the US. According to an enthusiastic Macaluso, this could translate into millions of potential buyers and would thus provide a much-needed boost for housing markets in states such as Florida, California and Colorado.

However, with immigration matters generally high on the agenda in the US, the NAR seem to have been holding back on the concept. Maybe now, the Florida Association of Realtors can use the financial crisis as a springboard to help find a legislator willing to carry the proposal to Congress.

Sierra Vista Woman Gets Prison for Hiring Illegal Immigrants

A Sierra Vista woman has been sentenced to two months in federal prison and 12 months house arrest for her role in employing illegal immigrants at a construction company.

Carol Hill pleaded guilty in June to conspiracy to harbor illegal immigrants for profit and knowingly hiring at least 10 illegal immigrants within a 12-month period.

Judge Raner Collins noted that the 44-year-old office manager wasn't the "mastermind" of the operation at Sun Dry Wall & Stucco Inc. but that she deserved some jail time. Prosecutors say she admitted preparing false documents that helped dozens of illegal immigrants remain employed at the company.

Hill was among eight charged after a 2007 federal raid. Company President Ivan Hardt has pleaded not guilty and awaits trial.

CBP Offers International Travel Tips for Holiday Season

Customs and Border Protection is providing key travel tips to help international travelers prepare for this busy holiday travel season. CBP processes more than one million passengers and pedestrians on a daily basis at the nation’s 327 air, land and sea ports of entry.

“The holiday season is a busy time for international travel,” said CBP Commissioner W. Ralph Basham. “We want to help ensure your entry into the United States is a positive experience. We take our role in facilitating legitimate trade and travel very seriously and want to make sure travelers have all the resources and information necessary to make their traveling experience a positive one.”

CBP offers some travel tips for your visit or return to the United States:

Make sure that you have all the required travel documents for the countries you are visiting, as well as identification for re-entry to the United States. A passport is required for returning U.S. citizens when flying internationally.

Know the rules and regulations concerning food and agricultural items before you travel, as some are prohibited or must meet certain requirements, such as a license or permit. In addition, all live birds and bird products, whether for personal or commercial use, may be restricted and/or quarantined.

Make sure you follow the directions on the CBP Customs Declaration form and fill out both sides.

When you arrive at a port of entry in the United States you will be inspected by a U.S. Customs and Border Protection officer. Be prepared to tell the officer the purpose of your trip and those items that you purchased or obtained abroad.

If you are headed overseas, learn about the country or countries you are visiting and any local conditions that might affect your trip by consulting the U.S Department of State.

U.S. travelers crossing at land ports of entry are urged to apply now for their passport card, SENTRI, NEXUS or FAST card or enhanced driver’s license from participating states, all of which incorporate a new vicinity RFID chip.

As a visitor to the U.S., when you depart be sure that the airline ticket agent collects your I-94 form and (where available) ‘check out’ at an automated exit kiosk.

CBP recommends the Global Entry pilot program for frequent international travelers. Global Entry is a new program to allow approved U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents returning to the U.S. to use the Global Entry kiosk as an alternative to the regular passport control line. At the kiosk, Global Entry members will activate the system by inserting their U.S. passport or lawful permanent resident card into a document reader. The kiosk will direct travelers to provide digital fingerprints and will compare that biometric data with the fingerprints on file.

As of Jan. 31, CBP no longer accepts only an oral declaration of citizenship. All individuals entering the country at land and sea ports of entry, from within the Western Hemisphere, must have documentary proof of identity and citizenship. Documents that can be used to gain entry into the U.S. include official passports, passport cards and copies of birth certificates along with government-issued photo identification, enhanced driver’s licenses, SENTRI, NEXUS and FAST cards.

Janet Napolitano Set to Become Obama's Secretary of Homeland Security

Janet Napolitano, the governor of Arizona, is expected to be named US secretary of Homeland Security by the Obama administration.

Napolitano has long complained about federal immigration law and last year implemented the country's most severe penalty for employers, whereby their business licenses are revoked for a second offence of knowingly hiring illegal immigrants.

Janet Napolitano’s tough stance, which she termed 'the business death penalty' was the 'most aggressive action in the country' and was designed to stem the flow of illegal workers. 'The states will take the lead, and Arizona will take the lead among the states,' she said, directing criticism at Congress and the federal government for their failure to bring about immigration reform.

But although Janet Napolitano has gained a reputation as a tough enforcer, also being the first Arizona state governor to ask the National Guard to protect its 600 km border with Mexico, she has shown sensitivity to other immigration issues in this politically complex state and has opposed most measures that would seek to punish illegal immigrants who were already living and working there.

Janet Napolitano vetoed several bills including one that would have required the police to arrest people in the state illegally and another, in 2005 that would have seen an end to, in-state tuition aid to students in the country illegally. "This bill goes too far by punishing even longtime residents of this state who were brought here as small children by their parents," she said, defending her position, which went against popular feeling.

Nonetheless, Janet Napolitano is 2 years into her second term of office in a Republican dominated state and her approval rating is well over 70%.

‘Janet Napolitano has attempted to take a middle ground, and her view is it has calmed the debate in Arizona,' said John Trasvina, president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund in Los Angeles.

Whilst Janet Napolitano has stopped short of giving her support to the border fence currently under construction, she has been an advocate of various measures aimed at controlling immigration, saying that 'Our current immigration system is broken. It is too easy for the 'bad guys' to enter our country and too difficult for the 'good guys', whose energies and intellects we need, to obtain lawful status.'

She has called for a streamlined visa process, 'tamper-proof immigration documents' and an improved national employer verification system that would make use of Social Security data. 'We have the technology; now we need to put it to work . . . so employers can perform real-time verification.' 'Employers who hire illegal immigrants, and know it, should be held accountable and penalized.'

She has also proposed a 'temporary worker program with no amnesty' that would help employers fill the need for workers. 'Foreign labour should not be a substitute for U.S. workers, but it is critical that we bring foreign workers out of the shadows, put the clamps on the underground labour market and bring greater stability to our workforce.'

But, for Janet Napolitano, the term 'temporary worker' means just that. 'I reject the term 'guest' worker,' she said. 'To me, this implies someone coming here to take a vacation. These people are coming to work.'

Various US Consulates Require Use of DS-160

Some US Consulates abroad are requiring the use of the DS-160 form. For Non-Immigrant Visas, the US Consulates in Nuevo Laredo, Monterrey, Montreal, and Vancouver require the DS-160 online form. As of November 24, 2008, the U.S. Consulate in Hong Kong will require the use of the DS-160 form for petition based applicants (H, L, O, P, and Q visas).

US Immigrant Groups To March the Day after Obama Takes Control

Immigrant rights organizations in the United States have planned a major march in Washington on 21 January, 2009, the day after Barack Obama is sworn in as the 44th US president.

Some 30 organizations, representing tens of millions of immigrants, will work together to demonstrate their case for immigration reform and remind Barack Obama of one of the policy issues so central to his campaign and which helped secure a large Hispanic vote. Of 10 million Hispanic votes cast, two thirds were for Barack Obama.

Angelica Salas, director of the Los Angeles-based Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, explained that the purpose of the demonstration was to ask for reforms and for an end to the raids that have seen illegal immigrants arrested and deported.

"We ask the president-elect to consider immigration reform one of his 10 domestic priorities," she told reporters.

According to Salas, reform legislation should begin "in the first 100 days" of Obama's term.

Both Barack Obama and Republican Senator John McCain had been involved in a previous immigration reform plan in 2007, but The US Congress failed to pass that version, which proposed far reaching changes. It would have given legal status and a path to citizenship for the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants residing in the United States.

Immigration reform earned broad support from both Obama and McCain during the election campaign but in the final months before the election; the issue took a back seat to the developing economic crisis.

Chung-Wha Hong, executive director of the New York Immigration Coalition, said that organizers were 'trying to mobilize tens of thousands of immigrants' for the march, which would be used to highlight the vital role that immigrants could play in an American economic recovery.

Bush’s Administration had Striking Effects on US Immigration

According to US authorities, in the last year the government arrested and deported record numbers of illegal immigrants whilst in the same period it naturalized a record number of new Americans. With figures of 350,000 and more than 1 million respectively, Bush administration officials consider these to be great accomplishments within a system that President-elect Obama calls "broken and overwhelmed".

"We are seeing the kinds of results that the country hasn't seen for many years," Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said last month.

After Congress failed to pass comprehensive immigration reform in 2007, the administration became more determined in its enforcement of existing immigration laws. The government also hired more people to process applications for immigrants who want to enter the country legally.

These enhancements led to a dramatic increase in the number of arrests of both illegal immigrants and the employers who hired them, as well as decreases in the amount of time it takes to process immigration applications.

The time taken for naturalization applications, previously 16-18 months, has now been reduced to a more healthy 9-10 months. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has reduced its backlog to 1.1 million applications, which is down from a record backlog of 3.6 million in 2004. It claims to be on track to eliminate the backlog entirely by October 2009.

The government recently awarded a five-year, $491 million contract to IBM to convert a paper-based immigration processing system to an electronic system. According to the Pew Hispanic Centre, there are currently about 11 million illegal immigrants living in the US, reflecting no increase from the previous year.

But, despite the achievements, the next administration will need to go back to Congress for comprehensive reform if the immigration problem is to be solved completely, according to Chertoff, who oversees immigration.

Pressure to revisit immigration reform should build quickly from Latino supporters, various immigration groups and some business interests. The large Democratic majorities could help to move a bill through Congress, though this could be tempered by the large numbers of Democrats from conservative districts who are wary of going too far. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said that Democrats may have to give up some of their priorities on immigration reform, such as giving illegal immigrants a path to citizenship, in order to gain overall agreement to change.

Obama’s Kenyan half-aunt, an illegal in Boston, to Fight US Deportation Order

According to reports, the paternal aunt of President-elect, Barack Obama, is to fight a US Government move to deport her to her native Kenya.

Barack Obama's aunt, a Kenyan woman who has been quietly living in public housing in Boston, is in the United States illegally after an immigration judge rejected her request for asylum four years ago, The Associated Press has learned.

Sen. Barack Obama's aunt, Zeituni Onyango on his Kenyan father's side reportedly lives in this complex in South Boston.

Zeituni Onyango, 56, referred to as "Aunti Zeituni" in Obama's memoir was first ordered to leave the United States in 2004 after her request for political asylum was rejected. Since then she has been living in a public housing estate in Boston from where she fled to Cleveland, Ohio. Just few days before the November 4 election her immigration status and relationship to Mr. Obama were first revealed by the press.

She has repeatedly declined requests for an interview but her lawyer, Ms. Margaret Wong advised that she is considering legal tactics which could enable her to stay. Her original asylum application is thought to have been based on a claim that she may fall victim to ethnic violence should she return to Kenya.

Even though the situation in Kenya has now eased somewhat, it could probably be argued that her risk of harm in that country is now more elevated as a result of the international attention focused on her.

An immigration judge might thus look favorably on a request for asylum at this stage.

Mr. Obama has said, through his transition team, that he is unaware of the details of his aunt's case and that he expects US law to take its due course.

Barack Obama, the 44th President of US is an African-American – first time in American history!

Senator Obama -- now President-Elect Obama -- won the election handily, with 349 electoral votes compared to his opponent John McCain's 162 electoral votes.

This was first time in U.S. history that an African American was elected as president. It was also the first time in the history of US that two sitting senators ran against each other, as well as the first time an African American was a presidential nominee for a major party. In addition, it was the first time in history that both major candidates were born outside the continental United States — Hawaii for Obama and the Panama Canal Zone for McCain. Since the Republican nominee for vice-president was a woman, Governor Sarah Palin, the eventual winning ticket was bound to be historic, as neither an African American nor a female had achieved either of the respective offices. Senator Joseph Biden is the first Roman Catholic vice president to be elected.

This was the 56th consecutive quadrennial United States presidential election to select the President and the Vice President of the United States. On January 20, 2009, Democrat Barack Obama is scheduled to be unveiled as the 44th president of the United States. The Democrat, Barack Obama says that that he will withdraw troops from Iraq, cut taxes for 95 percent of working families and improve America’s relationships with its allies has certainly brought smiles and satisfaction for both the foreign and US nationals. It’s quite certain that the citizens of US hold lots of expectations from the 44th president of the United States.

One inspiring aspect to his election to the highest office in the United States is the knowledge that anyone born in America can become President of the United States if they strive for that goal, no matter what their background is.

Barack Obama, son of the late Barack Hussein Obama Sr. -- a Kenyan national -- and Ann Dunham, a United States citizen, is an example of the quintessential "American Dream".

His parents met while attending the University of Hawaii at Manoa, where Obama Sr. was a foreign student. They later divorced and Obama went on to live in Indonesia with his mother's new husband, an Indonesian national named Lolo Soetoro.

Obama lived in Indonesia until he was ten years old, before moving back to the United States. He later went on to study law and political science. Only a short time after being elected to the US Senate, Obama became nationally recognized after a rousing speech given at the 2004 Democratic National Convention.

He was quickly perceived by his party as a viable candidate for 2008 after the Democratic defeat and re-election of George W. Bush in 2004. The rest is history in a very literal sense.

"If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible, who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time, who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer," Obama said during his acceptance speech on 04 November 2008.

Obama's incredible mandate with the American population may have had a significant boost from voters that the opposition Republican Party underestimated...mainly immigrant voters.

Obama has voiced his support for US immigration reform in the past, both to help the growing Hispanic population and so that there is more skilled immigration to help the U.S. economy maintain its global competitiveness.

And while his opponent John McCain had similar views on immigration reform -- in direct opposition to the views held by most of his own party -- the Arizona Senator seemed to back off from his stance in an effort to appease his party's base once he became the Republican nominee for President.

Whatever the reason is that propelled Barack Obama to the highest office in the United States, his promise of 'change' is sure to take hold, for better or for worse. How it will play out for the nation's struggle with immigration reform still remains to be seen.

Obama Takes Early Leadership Role In Face Of Economic Crisis

President-elect Barack Obama said Friday that he would make the middle class his first priority when he assumes the presidency in January 2009. In an unprecedented step, Obama held a press conference well before he is inaugurated. He was solemn in his remarks, stating that the United States is facing the "greatest economic challenge of our lifetime."

President-elect Barack Obama said Friday that he would make the middle class his first priority when he assumes the presidency in January 2009. In an unprecedented step, Obama held a press conference well before he is inaugurated. However, Obama is being held to high standards in his expectations and is already receiving President George W. Bush's daily intelligence briefing. He attempted to temper these expectations, telling reporters that

"the United States has only one government and one President, and until January 20th of next year, that government is the current administration."

Dean Baker, an economist and co-director of the Center for Economic Policy Research, says that the prominent press conference could be an attempt by President-elect Barack Obama to "give the appearance that he is taking charge" in the face of the economic crisis.

Keeping in view the October's dismal employment report and the struggling automotive industry Baker quoted that the economy of United States is "really in very very bad shape," and that it "made a lot of sense for (President-Barack Obama) to step forward."

"People are very scared with cause - this is, with the possible exception of 1980 - 1982, this is the sharpest downturn we've had in the postwar period," Baker said.

Looking ahead, Obama pledged to confront the current economic crisis, which has the U.S. economy in what appears to be a deep and possibly prolonged recession, "head-on by taking all necessary steps to ease the credit crisis, help hardworking families, and restore growth and prosperity."

The press conference was held immediately following a meeting with Obama's Transition Economic Advisory Board, featuring several prominent members from both the private and public sectors on Obama's economic transition board, including billionaire investor Warren Buffett, former Treasury Secretaries Robert Rubin and Lawrence Summers, former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, and former SEC Chairman William Donaldson.

CBP Issues Veterans Day and Remembrance Day Travel Advisory

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is reminding travelers planning trips across the border into the United States to make sure they have their proper documents and to anticipate possible heavy traffic during the observance of Veterans Day in the United States and Remembrance Day in Canada, both holidays are observed on November 11. Travelers are reminded of few simple steps they can employ to cross the border.

Plan your trip and allow extra time for crossing the border.

Avoid peak travel times when at all possible. The heaviest traffic periods are typically between the hours of 7 a.m. and 7 p.m.

Be prepared to show proof of citizenship and identity to enter the United States. This can include a passport, trusted traveler program card, an enhanced driver’s license or a birth certificate with a conventional driver’s license. Travelers 18 and under can present just a birth certificate.

Be advised that if you are crossing at a port of entry that has a NEXUS lane, only those travelers that possess NEXUS cards and have the card in their possession may utilize the NEXUS lane when it is operational.

Travelers are advised to declare all agriculture products including firewood and kindling, and those who are transporting either are subject to additional inspection by CBP agriculture specialists. If your firewood and/or kindling are suspected to contain any harmful pests it will be refused at the border and you may be required to return it home or otherwise properly dispose of it. Failure to declare agriculture products, including firewood and kindling will result in delays and can incur on the spot civil penalties

U.S. Border Patrol Achieves Substantial Results in 2008

The U.S. Border Patrol, a law enforcement component of Customs and Border Protection (CBP), achieved substantial results during fiscal year 2008 toward securing our Nation’s border between the ports of entry. Focusing on the right combination of personnel, technology, and infrastructure along with partnerships and special enforcement operations enabled positive results in preventing, deterring, or apprehending illicit cross-border traffic.

Chief David V. Aguilar recognized the accomplishments of the Border Patrol. “Our men and women have made significant progress towards securing our Nation’s borders. The hard work, dedication, and perseverance of our personnel are what will continue us on the path toward increased border security.”

“I thank the agents and employees of the CBP’s Border Patrol for their continuing efforts and sacrifices to safeguard our country and our families.”

An intense recruiting effort led by Border Patrol agents resulted in a current workforce of 17,499 Border Patrol agents. CBP plans to have 18,000 Border Patrol agents on-board by the end of calendar year 2008.

While personnel, technology, and infrastructure increased, there were significant decreases in arrests and drug seizures. The United States Border Patrol arrested 723,825 illegal aliens in FY 2008, a 17 percent decrease compared with 876,704 in FY 2007. Border Patrol agents seized 1,642,420 pounds of marijuana, 9,272 pounds of cocaine, and 735 ounces of heroin, decreases of 12, 35, and 61 percent, respectively.

Unfortunately, the Border Patrol’s successes were not obtained without sacrifice. There were 1,097 assaults perpetrated against agents in an increasingly violent and dangerous border environment. Sadly, in 2008, two Border Patrol agents made the ultimate sacrifice while performing their duties.

Border Patrol Agent Jarod Dittman was killed in a single vehicle accident on March 30, near San Diego, Calif.

Border Patrol Agent Luis Aguilar was struck and killed by a fleeing drug smuggler in the Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area near Yuma, Ariz., on January 19.

Strategic partnerships and operations were initiated or expanded to aid in deterring, detecting, or apprehending would-be illegal aliens. One such program is Operation Streamline. Under the auspices of Operation Streamline, illegal aliens who are amenable to prosecution guidelines, are charged with illegal entry and must appear before a U.S. Magistrate Judge prior to being removed from the United States. There more than were 74,000 illegal aliens prosecuted under Operation Streamline since the inception of the program. Operation Streamline was expanded from the Del Rio Sector to include all of Yuma and Laredo Sectors, and some of the Rio Grande Valley Sector. Similar programs were initiated in the Tucson Sector.

Another strategic program known as Operation Against Smugglers Initiative on Safety and Security continues to be embraced by both the United States and Mexico as a successful cross-border prosecution and deterrent to smugglers. In FY 2008, OASISS generated 483 principals presented for prosecution. Of these cases, 351 were accepted for prosecution.

Northern Border and Coastal Border operations also included several strategic operations and programs. Along the Northern Border, the Integrated Border Enforcement Teams program encompasses 15 regions along the Northern Border and is a multi-faceted law enforcement initiative comprised of both Canadian and American partners. The IBET is considered a “best practice” by both the Canadian and United States Governments.

Along our Coastal Borders, the Border Patrol continues to fortify relationships among our law enforcement partners through the Caribbean Border Interagency Group, which was created in 2006. CBIG continues to detect, deter, and apprehend smugglers of illegal aliens and contraband through a multi-agency partnership including the U.S. Border Patrol, Office of Field Operations, Office of Air and Marine, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, United States Coast Guard, and the Department of Justice.

The Border Patrol was able to procure 30 Mobile Surveillance System units and 2,500 Unattended Ground Sensors. These detection systems are currently being deployed throughout the Border Patrol. The MSS represents the latest technology that combines ground surveillance radar, infrared/day cameras, and laser range finders/designators, creating a more complete situational picture for agents in the field.
The concentrated effort to construct infrastructure to aid in securing our Nation’s borders increased pedestrian fencing by 49 miles and vehicle fencing by 44.2miles, for a total of 216 and 154.2 miles along the Southwest Border, respectively.

CBP to open Andrade port of entry earlier during agriculture harvest season

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will open the Andrade port of entry two hours early Monday through Saturday, starting November 10 through December 27, to accommodate the seasonal influx of agricultural workers from Mexico. Hours of operation at the port will be from 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. during the two-month period.

Currently, hours of operation at the Andrade border station are 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. daily. The two-lane port normally processes as many as 12,000 pedestrians and 3,000 vehicles daily during the peak winter season.

The expansion of hours of operation at the Andrade border station is designed to offer another option for travelers who usually cross into the United States in the early morning hours through the San Luis, Arizona, port of entry.

“We’ve worked to expand the hours of operation at the port of entry to mitigate wait times during peak hours and better serve the Yuma area communities,” said Raymond Nagy, CBP port director at the Andrade facility.

Currently, the San Luis port of entry screens and processes approximately 5,400 pedestrians and 2,200 vehicles daily between midnight and 8 am.

A Company in Virginia aggress to pay nearly $1.7 million in back wages to H-1B workers following the DOL Investigation

GlobalCynex Inc., a Sterling information technology company, has agreed to pay $1,683,584 to 343 H-1B non-immigrant workers after a U.S. Labor Department (DOL) investigation found the company violated the H-1B visa provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

An investigation by the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division found that employees hired under the H-1B visa program were not paid required wages from March 2005 through March 2007. Wage and Hour Division investigators also found that the company charged new H-1B visa workers training fees ranging from $1,000 to $2,500 that were in violation of the law.

"This case underscores the firm stance the Wage and Hour Division is taking to ensure that employers do not undercut American workers by underpaying temporary foreign workers," said Corlis Sellers, regional administrator for the Wage and Hour Division's Northeast Region.

The H-1B visa program permits employers to temporarily hire foreign workers in professional occupations such as computer programmers, engineers, physicians and teachers. H-1B visa workers must be paid at least the same wage rates as are paid to U.S. workers who perform the same type of work or the prevailing wages in the areas of intended employment.

The Wage and Hour Division enforces the H-1B visa wage provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), in addition to other federal laws pertaining to wage payments.

CBP Installs Radiation Monitors in Alabama Port

U. S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) announced on October 3, 2008 that they have unveiled the first radiation portal monitors at the Port of Mobile, Ala. yesterday. The CBP designed these highly sophisticated tools to prevent any attempts to smuggle radiological materials used in nuclear weapons into the United States.

The five portal monitors now in operation act as an extremely sensitive receiving antenna to detect radiation sources. A radiation portal monitor is a detection device that provides CBP with a passive, non-intrusive means to screen trucks and other conveyances for the presence of nuclear and radiological materials.

These systems are capable of detecting various types of radiation emanating from nuclear devices, dirty bombs, special nuclear materials, natural sources, and isotopes commonly used in medicine and industry. They are completely safe for anyone passing by them; they are passive “detectors” of radiation, not emitters of radiation.

“RPMs are just one component in our layered defense; intelligence analysis, a highly trained and dedicated workforce, and partnership with the trade community are also key elements to ensure port security,” said Robert C. Gomez, CBP operations director for the Atlanta/New Orleans region.

The Changing Face of U.S. Immigration

The United States has always been known to be the world's 'melting pot' of cultures. America has always been a nation of immigrants. Over the course of its existence, the makeup of America's newest citizens has changed – from European pioneers that forged a new nation in its early days to the recent wave of Hispanic and Asian migrants adding their skills and talents to the world's largest economy.

Each year, the USCIS grants Family based Immigration, Employment based Immigration or military based immigration to hundreds of thousands of immigrants. U.S. Citizenship grants a number of benefits to people who have decided to make America their home, including the right to vote, additional government benefits, and priority treatment for bringing relatives to the United States.

Immigration has slowly but constantly changed the demographic makeup of the U.S. Since the 1960s, the countries of origin for America’s immigrants have shifted from Europe to Asia and Latin America.

Statistics from United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) detail this shift and highlight the ever increasing influence immigration and citizenship imparts on the nation.

From 1971 to 1980, the United States naturalized approximately 1.5 million immigrants. The leading countries of origin during this decade were the Philippines, Cuba, and China. This trend represented a major shift from earlier years when European countries were the major source of new U.S. citizens.

During the 80s, almost 2.3 million people were granted U.S. citizenship. Nearly half of these new citizens came from Asia. Canada and Mexico accounted for nearly half of the remaining immigrants who became U.S. citizens during this period.

From 1991 to 2000 there was an enormous surge in the number of naturalizations, the greatest number of any decade in the nation's history. During this decade alone, 5.6 million people became U.S. citizens through naturalization. Mexico jumped into the lead as the country of origin, followed by Vietnam and the Philippines.

Since 2001, more than 4.4 million people have obtained U.S. citizenship through Naturalization. In just the first 10 months of fiscal year 2008, three quarters of a million people were naturalized. Since the new millennium, India joined Mexico as one of the leading countries of origin for immigrants.

Immigration will continue to dramatically change the demographic makeup of America in the coming decades. For instance, by 2050, it's expected that 1 in 4 Americans will be Hispanic. America has one of the most skilled work forces across the globe. As countries around the world assess their immigration priorities, whether it be to fill gaps in the labor market or address aging populations, many nations look to the United States as a model to emulate.

U.S. and U.K. Border Agencies Exchange Passenger Information to Protect Borders

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (USCBP) signed a joint agreement today in Washington, D.C., with the United Kingdom Border Agency (UKBA) to strengthen the countries’ borders by sharing information on people who may present a threat – including illegal immigrants, smugglers and foreign criminals – before they even arrive.

"Strong partnerships mean open lines of communication," said CBP Commissioner W. Ralph Basham. "This agreement equips our frontline personnel with the information they need to protect our citizens and facilitate legitimate trade and travel."

As a result of the agreement, CBP’s National Targeting Center (NTC) and UKBA’s Joint Borders Operations Centre will strengthen the capability of the U.S. and the U.K. to verify travel documents, detect false identities, determine admissibility, carry out customs purposes and identify persons traveling between the countries who may pose a security risk. The exchange of information between NTC and the JBOC will serve both enforcement and facilitation interests of both nations.

“The U.K. is currently undergoing the biggest shake up in its border security for 45 years. This agreement will mean that we are better informed about threats to our borders, and able to target our resources to deal with those threats,” said Brodie Clark, Head of the Border Force, UK Border Agency (UKBA). “It provides a model of international co-operation that will become increasingly important in delivering fast but firm border management.”

The agreement also will improve communication between the two agencies when a person is denied entry and returned to the traveler’s country of origin.

CBP and UKBA signed an agreement June 24 to develop a bilateral pilot program to facilitate travel between the two nations. The International Expedited Traveler Initiative will integrate CBP’s Global Entry program with the British registered traveler program.

US: Sarah Palin Silent on Immigration Issues

Republican Presidential hopeful John McCain surprised America by announcing Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his Vice-Presidential running mate - a virtual unknown in US politics. Since then, McCain's campaign has kept the press from interviewing Palin; her stance on a number of issues is unknown. This especially includes immigration - a hot topic in today's American political landscape.

Many non-partisan political websites mark Palin as having no stance on immigration. However, given John McCain's stated positions on the topic, and the amount of spotlight shining on his young running-mate, the issue is likely to come up before November when the nation chooses the next President.

In an unusual situation in America's two-party political scene, both McCain and his opponent Barack Obama are both on the record as supporting a guest worker program that offers a path to eventual citizenship. They also both support an increase in the nation's H-1B visa quota.

For McCain, his positions on immigration have caused some friction within his party. The topic of immigration was notably absent during the Republican Convention. With Sarah Palin garnering all the attention, the absence of such an important issue during the many speeches went virtually unnoticed.

Governor Palin's background in politics has not given her a much of a foundation to take a stance on this issue - there is no fence under discussion for her State's border with Canada. However, the press will have their chance to interview Palin soon; it remains to be seen what her position is on issues such as H-1B visas, a guest worker program and other topics that make up the debate on immigration reform.

CBP Launches New Phase of National Public Education Campaign – Reminded travelers to prepare for upcoming changes to cross-border document requirements

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Protection (CBP) announced today that it will launch the next phase of a national television, print and online advertising campaign during the National Football League © season kickoff game, to educate the public about new travel document requirements that will go into effect on June 1, 2009 under the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI).

"Since the time WHTI was first announced, we have taken seriously our obligation to inform travelers of the change in procedures," CBP Assistant Commissioner Thomas S. Winkowski said. "We will continue our efforts to remind travelers who don’t already have a document that they still have time to obtain one in advance of the June 2009 compliance date. The agency is committed to implementing WHTI in a common sense, flexible way that facilitates the flow of legitimate travelers and improves the security of our borders."

WHTI is the joint Department of State (DOS) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) plan that implements a 9/11 Commission recommendation to establish document requirements for travelers entering the United States who were previously exempt, including citizens of the U.S., Canada and Bermuda. This phase of CBP’s WHTI outreach efforts will include: a two-month schedule of national advertising on television, in magazines, and on the Web; public service announcements; the launch of a new Web site (www.GetYouHome.gov), and interactive widget; and distribution of collateral and compliance-related information through the media and various travel stakeholders.

On June 1, 2009, travelers will need to present a valid, acceptable document that denotes both identity and citizenship when entering the U.S. by land or sea. Most travelers will be able to select from one of six different documentation options, based upon their individual travel needs. Many U.S. and Canadian travelers already have a passport or another WHTI-compliant document. WHTI was implemented for air travelers in January 2007.

In addition to a passport, there are several other documents that CBP will accept at land and sea ports of entry from U.S. and Canadian citizens coming from Canada, Mexico, Bermuda or the Caribbean. These include the new U.S. Passport Card, new state/province-issued enhanced driver’s licenses, and the three CBP trusted traveler program cards.

All these documents utilize radio-frequency identification (RFID) technology. Among the U.S. Passport or the five RFID-enabled cards, travelers can select the documentation option that best fits their needs. Details on each of these options are available on the WHTI Web site.

By incorporating RFID technology into WHTI-compliant documents, the border-crossing process will be more efficient and effective. RFID is a secure technology that captures a unique identifier — a randomly assigned number — from the document just as the traveler approaches the border inspection station. No personal data is contained or transmitted by the RFID cards; the numerical identifier serves only as a pointer to gather information from CBP’s secure network for the officer.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a privacy impact assessment on the use of RFID in travel documents in January 2008 and another in July 2008 on border crossing processes.

CBP in San Diego Reminds Border Crossers to Anticipate More Traffic at Area Ports When School Year Begins

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials want to remind members of the traveling public to expect to see more cars and pedestrians at area border crossings in the coming days as the summer break for thousands of area students comes to an end.

“The beginning of the school year means more traffic on area highways, surface streets, roads near schools as well as border ports of entry,” said Gurdit Dhillon, CBP director of field operations in San Diego. “Now is the time for anyone who makes a morning commute, whether across town or across the border, to adjust their schedules to accommodate the additional demands that school related traffic places on area roads, streets, highways and international border crossings.”

Large numbers of students who attend classes at various private and public schools and colleges in San Diego commute from Mexico to the U.S. on a daily basis. This increase in traffic, especially during the traditionally busy morning commute, can result in longer than normal crossing times.

“The impact can be felt across the board including the fast-pass and pedestrian lanes,” said Dhillon. “Domestic commuters traditionally adjust the morning commute schedule at this time of the year and all border crossers should plan accordingly as well.”

Being prepared for the inspection process by having documents ready for the CBP officer, declaring all items acquired in Mexico, and ending cell phone conversations before arriving at the inspection station can also reduce wait times.

Direct Mail Program Adds Forms I-800 and I-800A

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announces publication of a Federal Register Notice that expands its Direct Mail Program to include Form I 800, Petition to Classify Convention Adoptee as an Immediate Relative, and Form I 800A, Application for Determination of Suitability to Adopt a Child from a Convention Country. Applicants were previously required to file at a USCIS field office with jurisdiction over their place of residence. The Direct Mail Program allows USCIS to process applications more efficiently by eliminating duplicative work, maximizing staff productivity, and introducing better information management tools.

Beginning on September 25, 2008, applicants must submit Forms I 800, I 800A, and all related supplements and forms to the USCIS Chicago Lockbox facility for initial processing, using the following address:

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
P.O. Box 805695
Chicago, IL 60680-4118

If you are filing Hague-related Forms I 601, Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility; I 864, Affidavit of Support Under Section 213A of the Act; I 864EZ, Affidavit of Support Under Section 213A of the Act; or I 864W, Intending Immigrant’s Affidavit of Support Exemption; with Form I 800, you must also send these forms to the Lockbox address.

USCIS will forward incorrectly-filed forms to the USCIS Chicago Lockbox facility address ONLY for the first 30 days after September 25, 2008. USCIS will forward to the USCIS Chicago Lockbox facility any Form I-800A, Form I-800, or related forms and fees received by any office other than the USCIS Chicago Lockbox facility only if they are received before October 27, 2008. Beginning October 27, 2008, USCIS will return any Form I 800 or I 800A, and related supplements and forms, mailed to a USCIS office other than the USCIS Chicago Lockbox facility address to the applicant and require the applicant to mail the application directly to the USCIS Chicago Lockbox for processing.

Q & A: Changes to the Tuberculosis and Vaccination Requirements for Adjustment of Status

Tuberculosis
Q: What are the new requirements for tuberculosis (TB) testing and treatment?
Detailed information on the new requirements are available in the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) document, Tuberculosis Component of the Technical Instructions to Civil Surgeons for the Medical Examination of Aliens in the United States. A link to this document, along with a memo outlining the changes to the TB testing requirements and frequently asked questions, is available in the related links section of this page.

Some of the major changes to the TB requirements include:

Applicants with Class A tuberculosis must complete a full course of TB treatment before receiving medical clearance by USCIS for adjustment of status.
A chest x-ray is required for all applicants with a tuberculin skin test (TST) reaction of less than 5 mm who have signs or symptoms of TB or immunosuppression.
A chest x-ray is required for all applicants with a TST reaction of more than 5 mm, including pregnant women.
Sputum cultures and drug susceptibility testing for positive cultures are required for applicants with chest x-ray findings suggestive of active TB disease.

Q: Who is required to have a TB test?
All applicants two years of age or older are required to have a tuberculin skin test (TST). Children younger than age two are required to have a TST if there is evidence of contact with a person known to have TB or if there is other reason to suspect TB. If evidence of TB infection is found, a chest x-ray is required. Any person with a positive skin test reaction of more than 5mm will also be required to undergo a chest x-ray.

Q: When did the new TB requirements become effective?
The new TB testing and treatment requirements became effective on May 1, 2008. However, CDC allowed a 30 day grace period. Therefore, any medical exam that takes place on or after June 1, 2008 must be performed in accordance with the new TB testing requirements.

Q: Will USCIS accept Form I-693 if the civil surgeon performed a chest x-ray without the TST?
No, the civil surgeon must administer the TST, unless one of the exceptions listed in the Technical Instructions applies. If the civil surgeon performs a chest x-ray without giving the applicant the TST, the reason for omitting the TST must be noted on Form I-693.

Vaccinations
Q: What are the new vaccination requirements?
The CDC has revised its vaccination requirements. As of July 1, 2008, the following additional vaccinations are required in order to adjust status to legal permanent resident:

Rotavirus
Hepatitis A
Meningococcal
Human papillomavirus
Zoster

NOTE: Some of these vaccinations are required for certain age groups only. During the examination with the civil surgeon, he or she will review the vaccination history, and may determine that certain vaccinations are not necessary or not appropriate. Specific information on vaccines, including tables on age-appropriate vaccines and ACIP recommendations, are available at CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases (NCIRD) website, accessible in the related links section of this page.

Q: When will the new vaccination requirements become effective?
The new vaccination requirements became effective on July 1, 2008. However, CDC approved a 30 day grace period until August 1, 2008. Therefore, for any medical exam conducted on or after August 1, 2008, the new vaccinations, if appropriate, must be administered in order for USCIS to approve the applicant for adjustment of status.

Q: Is there a waiver available for applicants who cannot afford the new vaccinations?
No. The qualifications for a waiver remain unchanged.

Q: Where can I find additional information on the new vaccination requirements?
The Technical Instructions to Civil Surgeons for Vaccination Requirements include detailed information on the vaccination requirements, including a full list of required vaccinations. A link to the Technical Instructions and any updates to the medical exam requirements can be found in the related links section of this page.

Q: Does USCIS require that all shots in each vaccine series be completed before applying for adjustment of status?
No. The applicant must have received all the required age-appropriate vaccines that could be given at the time of the medical exam. If the applicant has started the vaccination series, but is not able to complete all the required shots because, at the time of the medical exam, the minimum time interval between shots has not passed, the applicant may still apply for adjustment of status. A waiver is available in cases where, due to required time intervals, it was impossible for the applicant to receive all shots in the series before submitting the application for adjustment of status.

For example, the Hepatitis A vaccine requires that applicant receive two doses of vaccine, six months apart. If the applicant receives the first dose in January, he or she does not have to wait until July, when the second dose would be given, to submit the adjustment of status application. However, the applicant must have received at least the first dose of the vaccine, if appropriate, before applying for adjustment of status.

Form I-693
Q: When did the new Form I-693 become effective?
The revised Form I-693, Report of Medical Examination and Vaccination Record (edition date 04/02/08), became effective on May 1, 2008. USCIS allowed for a 30 day grace period in which it would accept the prior version of Form I-693. Therefore any medical exam conducted on or after June 1, 2008 must be recorded on a revised Form I-693.

Q: Why was Form I-693 revised in April 2008?
Form I-693 was revised to include the new requirements that CDC made to its TB Component of the Technical Instructions and was released at the same time as the new Technical Instructions. Other significant changes to the form included a new referral section with requirements that all necessary follow-up treatment and evaluations be completed prior to the applicant or civil surgeon signing and completing the form. Additionally, the prior vaccination supplement was assimilated as part 2, section 5 of the revised form.

Q: Why does USCIS now have an even newer edition (06/05/08) of Form I-693 on the web?
When CDC added new vaccination requirements to its Technical Instructions for Vaccination, effective July 1, 2008, there were concerns that civil surgeons may forget to add in the new vaccinations in the vaccination chart, resulting in incomplete forms. This revised edition includes the newly required vaccinations by name.

Q: If an applicant is required to receive only the vaccinations, and not undergo the entire medical exam, does he/she have to submit the entire Form I-693?
No. Applicants who are not required to have the entire medical examination need to submit only pages one, three and five of the new form. The required sections include Part 1, Information About You, the vaccination record portion of Part 2, and Part 5 (if the vaccinations are administered by a civil surgeon) or Part 6 (if the vaccinations are administered by a local health department). Pages two and four, that would have been left blank, do not need to be submitted.

Q: Does a designated civil surgeon have to sign Part 6 of Form I-693, or can the health department immunization staff sign it?
The signature in Part 6 must be the physician at the health department. It may be an original or stamped signature. The health department nurse or other health care professional may, but is not required to, co-sign the vaccination supplement. Part 6 will only be completed for those applicants who are filing based on refugee status.

Q: Does the civil surgeon have to complete both the Vaccination Table and the Results section to properly complete the vaccination portion of Form I-693?
Yes. USCIS requires the civil surgeon to completely fill out the vaccination table and the Results section. The civil surgeon must note in the vaccination table the complete vaccination history, date(s) of vaccinations given by the civil surgeon, and any waiver requests.

Q. I had my medical exam completed before the new TB or vaccination requirements went into effect, and have not yet submitted it to USCIS, or I have submitted it but it has not yet been reviewed. Am I now required to have a new medical exam that meets the new TB and/or vaccination requirements before I can adjust status?
Generally, no. When reviewing a Form I-693, USCIS will note the date the exam was conducted and refer to the Technical Instructions, medical requirements, and form edition that were in effect at that particular time, remembering that for each revision of the Technical Instructions there was a 30-day grace period. If the civil surgeon conducted the medical exam properly and in keeping with the exam requirements and form edition in effect on that particular date, there is no need to return for a second exam or to have the results recorded on a newer edition of Form I-693, as long as you submit the Form I-693 before its one-year expiration.

Guide to Revised Form I-693, TB Testing/Treatment and Vaccination Requirements

Date of Medical Exam	Do I have to submit the revised Form I-693?	Does the medical exam have to be done in accordance with the new TB requirements?	Do I have to receive the new vaccines (if age appropriate?)
Before June 1, 2008	No	No	No
June 1 – July 31, 2008	Yes Edition dates 4/2/08 and 6/5/08 are acceptable	Yes	No
On or after Aug. 1, 2008	Yes - must submit Edition date 6/5/08	Yes	Yes

Civil Surgeon Questions
Q: Form I-693 now states patients who require a chest X-ray must include the copy of the X-ray report with the I-693 packet. What type of X-ray report is acceptable?
USCIS will only accept a full and formal radiologist’s chest X-ray report, whether a copy or an original, signed by the radiologist and on official hospital or medical office letterhead. USCIS cannot accept any preliminary or incomplete evaluation, whether handwritten or not, that does not describe the full evaluation or findings. In most cases, the civil surgeon will have to wait a day or two before this report has been sent by the reviewing medical office and can therefore not sign off on the Form I-693 until this report has been received.

Q: Both the CDC and USCIS have revised their requirements for medical referrals, as notated on Form I-693. In what instances must the referral section in Part 3 be completed?
Only complete Part 3, Referral to Health Department or Other Doctor / Facility, if the referral was required, such as when a Class A condition is suspected and needs further evaluation. Do not complete Part 3 if the referral was merely recommended by the CDC. Instead notate the (recommended but not required) referral in the Remarks box under that particular disease or disorder. This will help alleviate the possibility of USCIS rejecting the Form I-693 due to an erroneous assumption that a follow-up evaluation was needed before completion of the form.

CBP Responds to Hurricane Dolly

Today at the news conference held at the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Jayson Ahern, CBP Deputy Commissioner said, “U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) currently is maintaining normal border security operations at and between our ports of entry in the impacted area of the border. We have established our lead field coordinator, which is Chief Ron Vitiello, our local Border Patrol sector chief. We also are actively maintaining liaison officers at local, state and FEMA command and coordination centers in order to most effectively commit our resources to those agencies and individuals in need. We have approximately 3,500 employees who are living in the impacted area and who continue to work toward keeping our country safe.

We also have either forward deployed or put on alert some of our special teams like our BORSTAR search and rescue assets and have additional frontline personnel and equipment from outside the impacted area on standby to deploy should that become necessary for us to maintain normal operations or assist in recovery.

We are constantly assessing the situation on the ground. Clearly stated: We will not impede a safe, speedy and officially ordered evacuation. Saving lives is always the paramount responsibility of this department and the same is true at the border. We have repeatedly communicated that our highest priority will be the safe evacuation of people who are leaving the danger zone. Our agents and officers are available to help anyone, regardless of citizenship or nationality.

Further, our enforcement responsibilities will not impede the facilitation of Mexican nationals or colonial residents during an officially ordered evacuation. Obviously, our laws will not be suspended, but CBP's priority will be assisting local officials as they carry out a safe and speedy evacuation of people leaving the impacted area.

However, we do know that criminal organizations will attempt to take advantage of the weather situation. For example just a short while ago we caught smugglers with a load of narcotics in the 5,000 pound range attempting to pass through our Highway 77 checkpoint, thinking they would find our operations reduced. Let me be clear to criminals thinking they will take advantage of the storm or its aftermath, we will remain active and vigilant in enforcing the laws.

Should circumstances warrant, CBP field leaders have the authority to implement alternative measures, dependent on circumstances, to reduce the processing time for individuals seeking entry into the U.S. or passing through Border Patrol checkpoints.”

With the above instance quoted by the CBP Deputy Commissioner it is evident and clear that in spite of the bad weather conditions prevailing in the state, CBP officers will remain active and vigilant in enforcing the laws and ensuring safety at the border and they will leave no opportunity to the criminals to take any advantage of the present situation in the State.

NOTE: The following statement concerning CBP’s response to Hurricane Dolly in Texas by Jayson Ahern, CBP Deputy Commissioner, was presented at a news conference at the Federal Emergency Management Agency today.

EOIR Requires 9Digit Alien Registration Numbers

When Filing Documents with EOIR and Accessing Case Info via Automated Phone System

The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) announced today that, effective July 21, 2008, documents filed with EOIR’s immigration courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) should indicate 9-digit Alien Registration Numbers (A numbers). For cases with a 9-digit A number, all digits must be provided. For cases with an 8-digit A number, a zero (0) must be inserted before the 8 digits. For example, A##-###-### should be provided as A0##-###-###. No document filings will be rejected in the foreseeable future for mistakenly failing to do so.

Also, 9-digit A numbers will be required to access immigration case status information through EOIR’s automated telephone system, which can be reached by dialing (703) 305-1662 or 1-800-898-7180 (toll-free). The system will direct callers to enter a zero (0) before the 8 digits of an 8-digit A number.

EOIR is implementing this requirement to be consistent with the Department of Homeland Security, which is currently issuing 9-digit A numbers.

EOIR –

EOIR, an agency within the Department of Justice (DOJ), is responsible for adjudicating immigration cases. Specifically, under delegated authority from the Attorney General, EOIR interprets and administers federal immigration laws by conducting immigration court proceedings, appellate reviews, and administrative hearings. EOIR consists of three components: the Office of the Chief Immigration Judge, which is responsible for managing the numerous immigration courts located throughout the United States where immigration judges adjudicate individual cases; the Board of Immigration Appeals, which primarily conducts appellate reviews of immigration judge decisions; and the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer, which adjudicates immigration-related employment cases. EOIR is committed to providing the fair, expeditious, and uniform interpretation and application of immigration law in all cases.

CBP, Texas Strengthen Partnership to Ensure Border Security

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Commissioner W. Ralph Basham and Texas Gov. Rick Perry met last week to reaffirm their commitment to work together to secure Texas's southern border and facilitate the flow of legitimate trade and travel.

“With more than 1,200 miles of land border, 25 land ports-of-entry, and extensive trade with Mexico, Texas is a key partner for CBP in achieving our mission.” Basham said. “I appreciate the work that Governor Perry and the men and women in Texas state and local law enforcement are doing to support our efforts to secure the border with Mexico. I also look forward to continuing to work with him and our others partners in the state to welcome legitimate trade and travel.”

CBP continues to have an effective partnership with Texas that includes information sharing and collaborative operations to seal off illegal activity along the Texas border. The focus of these operations is preventing and disrupting all crime, including illegal international drug and human trafficking, and achieving the CBP priority mission of keeping terrorists and their weapons from entering the United States. These operations coordinate the efforts of CBP’s Border Patrol and port security operations, the Texas Department of Public Safety, Texas Military Forces, Texas Parks and Wildlife and border-area sheriffs’ offices and police departments.

“Texas will not cede one inch to powerful and ruthless crime cartels or transnational gangs,” Gov. Perry said. “To effectively shut down this criminal element along our border, we need the right compliment of technology and personnel and that includes partnering with CBP and local law enforcement agencies.”

Gov. Perry discussed the significant resources provided by Texas to secure the Texas-Mexico border. These efforts include the temporary deployment of National Guard troops through Operation Jump Start and $110 million in state funds that are being used for key initiatives such as overtime for local law enforcement officers in communities along the border. CBP expressed its appreciation for the state’s ongoing efforts and support for the new state initiative dubbed “Texas Hold ’em” aimed at cracking down on commercial truckers who knowingly smuggle illegal weapons, drugs or humans across the Texas-Mexico border.

CBP also provided an update on key initiatives to improve security through deploying the right combination of personnel, technology, and tactical infrastructure to effectively maintain operational control of the border.

Commissioner Basham and Governor Perry agreed to continue working to identify additional ways to build on the success of the collaborative efforts between CBP and the State of Texas.

Immigration Court Practice Manual Is Effective July 1

The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) reminds parties appearing in immigration court that beginning on July 1, 2008, the Immigration Court Practice Manual will be effective nationwide, and the local operating procedures for immigration courts will no longer be used. The Practice Manual is available on EOIR’s website at http://www.usdoj.gov/eoir/.

The Immigration Court Practice Manual provides uniform procedures, requirements, and recommendations for parties who present cases before the immigration courts. Specifically, the Immigration Court Practice Manual addresses:

How attorneys and representatives enter appearances before the immigration court,
How parties file documents and forms with the immigration court,
How parties file and respond to motions before the immigration court,
How parties appeal immigration judge decisions,
Removal hearings and other proceedings before immigration judges,
Detention and bond issues,
Stays of removal orders,
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, and
Discipline of immigration attorneys and representatives.

The Practice Manual also includes useful resources:

Samples of commonly submitted documents,
Guidelines on formatting legal citations when filing papers in immigration court,
A glossary of terms and abbreviations commonly used in immigration court,
Contact information for immigration courts and EOIR offices, and
A word index for Practice Manual topics and a citation index for statutes, cases, and regulations.

EOIR’s Operating Policies and Procedures Memorandum 08-03 explain how the Immigration Court Practice Manual applies to cases that are pending on July 1, 2008. This OPPM is available on EOIR’s website http://www.usdoj.gov/eoir/efoia/ocij/oppm08/08-03.pdf .

The Immigration Court Practice Manual is a “living document.” EOIR will continue to update the manual online to reflect legal and policy changes, as well as input provided by the parties who use it. Information on how to submit comments and suggested changes is included in Chapter 13 of the Practice Manual.

The Immigration Court Practice Manual complements the existing Board of Immigration Appeals Practice Manual in providing important “how to” information to the people EOIR serves. The Board of Immigration Appeals Practice Manual is available on EOIR’s website at http://www.usdoj.gov/eoir/vll/qapracmanual/apptmtn4.htm.

EOIR, an agency within the Department of Justice, is responsible for adjudicating immigration cases. Specifically, under delegated authority from the Attorney General, EOIR interprets and administers federal immigration laws by conducting immigration court proceedings, appellate reviews, and administrative hearings. EOIR consists of three components: the Office of the Chief Immigration Judge, which is responsible for managing the numerous immigration courts located throughout the United States where immigration judges adjudicate individual cases; the Board of Immigration Appeals, which primarily conducts appellate reviews of immigration judge decisions; and the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer, which adjudicates immigration-related employment cases. EOIR is committed to providing the fair, expeditious, and uniform interpretation and application of immigration law in all cases.

'Know Before You Go' — CBP Reminds Travelers of Top10 Most Seized Items

A U.S. citizen returning from Europe surrenders toy-stuffed, egg-shaped confections.
An Asian visitor surrenders fake U.S. currency intended to be used during a ritual burial.
European visitor surrenders fine Cuban-made Corona cigars.
A visitor from the Mediterranean surrenders lamb to be used in a traditional festival.
A U.S. citizen surrenders a narcotic pipe purchased during a Caribbean vacation.

These stories are true. Over a million returning travelers and foreign visitors enter the United States by sea, by vehicle or by air everyday. Some attempt to enter the country with items that are prohibited by law as dangerous to our citizens, our agriculture or our commerce, or that are prohibited by international laws and treaties. Consequently, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers were duty-bound to detain and destroy these and many other types of inadmissible items.

Now that schools all across the region are letting out for summer and families are anxiously anticipating long-awaited vacations to fascinating destinations around the globe, CBP urges citizens to take one step equally as important in planning their vacations — visit CBP’s "Know Before You Go" website. The site provides travel related regulations and tips to help protect the traveler.

"We know that travelers plan extensively for international vacations, and we’re just asking that they take that one last step and know what they can and can’t bring into the United States," said Michael Lovejoy, director of CBP’s Baltimore field operations office. The CBP Baltimore field office includes popular airports and seaports in Southern New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland and Northern Virginia.

"The ‘Know Before You Go’ website is a vital planning resource that provides the rules governing what items people can legally bring to the U.S.," said Lovejoy. "I’d hate to see anyone unnecessarily lose their hard-earned money by purchasing items inadmissible to the U.S., especially in today’s economic environment."

To provide travelers a sense of the prohibited items that CBP officers seize most often, the CBP Baltimore field office is releasing the following Top-10 list of inadmissible items.

Top-10 Most-Seized Inadmissible Items

Smaller Kinder or Caffarel Eggs (small toy-stuffed chocolate confections)
Cuban cigars
Fresh, dried, canned meats or meat products
Many types of fruits and vegetables
Counterfeit commercial merchandise (handbags, watches, clothing, etc.)
Most plants, cuttings, seeds, unprocessed plant products or plant-based handicrafts
Many types of medications purchased outside the U.S.
Drugs and drug paraphernalia
Absinthe (a distilled spirit containing thujone known to produce psychedelic effects)
Fake U.S. currency, or Hell Notes that appear too similar to legitimate U.S. currency

"Travelers take extraordinary care to learn as much as they can to prepare for their foreign destination, we’d like them to exercise the same level of care to prepare for their return trip home," said Lovejoy.

For the latest news and for more information on international travel and advice for quickly clearing customs, please visit the CBP Travel website.

CBP to Issue New Frequent Traveler Cards

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) announced it will issue new cards for current Secure Electronic Network for Travelers Rapid Inspection members starting today and members should be receiving them within the next week.

The new cards will have enhanced security features and will allow U.S. citizen cardholders to comply with the documentary requirements of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative.

CBP will issue new SENTRI members the enhanced cards in July. All members must activate their cards within 30 days by going to the web. ( Global Online Enrollment System ) Additionally, current SENTRI members are requested to verify and update their contact information on-line. ( Global Online Enrollment System )

SENTRI is a land-border crossing program that provides expedited CBP processing for pre-approved, low-risk travelers along the U.S./Mexico border.

The SENTRI program was first implemented at Otay Mesa, Calif. in 1995, and has grown to include 16 lanes at the nine largest ports of entry along the U.S.-Mexico border including San Ysidro, Calif.; Calexico, Calif.; Nogales, Ariz.; two crossings in El Paso, Texas; and the Texas ports of Laredo, Hidalgo and Brownsville. More than 165,000 travelers from both sides of the border are currently registered in the SENTRI program.

A similar program called Nexus serves citizens of the U.S. and Canada on the northern border.

Student Exchange Visitor Program FAQ’s

Here are some of the ICE FAQ's on the proposed fee increase to the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP)

Q. Why is the Student Exchange and Visitor Program (SEVP) necessary?

SEVP enables millions of students around the world to take advantage of the U.S. educational system. The majority of students who come to the United States are seeking a quality education and meaningful cultural exchange. Unfortunately, there have been instances in which the system was exploited by those who would seek to do harm.

We cannot forget that a significant number of the terrorists involved in the 1993 World Trade Center attack and September 11th attack got into the country by exploiting our student visa system.

After the events of September 11, 2001, Congress directed the Department of Homeland Security to implement a better way of keeping track of international students and exchange visitors.

Q. What is the goal of SEVP?

To eliminate border vulnerabilities while protecting America’s open-door policy of welcoming students from around the globe.

To partner with the educational community.

To replace the old outdated paper-driven system of tracking international students with a more efficient online system.

Q. How is SEVP Funded?

Congress mandated that the program be funded through student and university fees.

Q. Why is the fee increase necessary?

This proposed fee increase is the first since the program was launched back in 2003. The original fees have not kept pace with the number of investigations into possible violations. In addition, end-users have requested enhancements to the system which require more resources to upgrade. Finally, the recertification of schools, which is mandated by Congress, will require additional funding and enhanced technologies.

The average yearly cost for a private four year education is $23,712. The proposed fee increase for international students is 0.002% of these overall costs.

Q. What is SEVIS?

The Student Exchange and Visitor Information System is the database that allows SEVP to track international students and visitors and ensure that they are in the United States for the purposes they stated in applying to come.

Q. What do the proposed increased fees fund that is new?

Efficiency: The enhanced SEVIS system which will include improved interactive feature for school administrators as well as a simplified application process.

Customer Service: Field liaisons who can provide local customized and one-on-one support.

National Security: More agents to follow up on alerts submitted by school administrators.

Re-certification: Will maintain the integrity and reputations of participating schools.

Q. Why is re-certification necessary?

The process is necessary to ensure that schools continue to meet the standards for hosting international students and properly maintaining records.

It prevents those few unscrupulous schools from abusing the system and tainting the reputations of all.

Q. What are the current fees?

The current fee for nonimmigrant students, referred to as the I-901 fee is currently $100.

The current fee for school certification is $350, with a site visit fee of $230.

The current fee of $35 for au pairs, camp counselors and summer work/travel program participants will remain unchanged.

There is no fee for government sponsored exchange visitors.

Q. What are the proposed fees?

The proposed fee rule affects both students and schools.

The proposed rule would set the fee for F and M (nonimmigrant students) at $200.

The proposed rule would set the fee for most J exchange visitors at $180.

For au pairs, camp counselors, and summer work/travel program participants, the fee remains the current $35.

There is still no fee for government sponsored exchange visitors.

The proposed rule would set the fee for school certification at $1700, plus $655 for each site visit.

Q. What is the fee impact on schools currently participating in the program

As those institutions currently participating have already paid a certification fee and as there is no charge for recertification, schools currently in the program will not be directly impacted by the proposed new fees.

Q. When will the fees take effect

The fees will take effect 30 days after the final fee rule is published.

Q. What will the fees fund

The fees will fund four significant enhancements including: SEVIS II, recertification, regional liaisons, and additional law enforcement resources.

Q. How were the fees calculated

SEVP is required to recoup the full cost associated with SEVIS. Modeling software was used to determine the full cost associated with: updating and maintaining the information on participating students; certifying and recertifying schools; overseeing school compliance; adjudicating appeals; investigating possible law violations and other threats to national security; providing outreach and education to users; and performing regulatory and policy analysis. The model was also used to identify management and overhead cost associated with the program.

Q. Is there a fee for recertification

No. There is no separate fee for school recertification.

Q. Why are some exchange visitors exempt from the fee increase

Statute prohibits increases in the fees charged to summer work students and government sponsored exchange visitors, two categories in the Exchange Visitor Program.

Q. Can’t SEVP find alternate sources of funding to reduce the impact on students and schools

No. Congress mandated that SEVP was to be fully funded through user fees.

Q. If schools elect not to recertify what happens to the international students who are in good standing and attending that school

These instructions are posted on the SEVP website, www.ice.gov.sevis. SEVP will work with these schools and their students to ensure that the students are aware of their options and that these options are implemented without undue inconvenience to the student.

Q. What is the role of the new regional liaisons

SEVP envisions that these field liaisons will assist schools in a variety of tasks including the initial school site visit and a range of training initiatives.

Q. Why are more special agents necessary

The number of leads and alerts being provided are increasing and more agents are required to follow up. By increasing the number of investigators, ICE will not only increase the protection of the American public and the students who come to American to live and study; it will also increase confidence among the public, the Congress and policymakers that our educational institutions are more secure and less susceptible to exploitation.

Q. Will the increased fees deter students from selecting the United States to study

We don’t believe so. In addition to implementing common sense security measures, all of the enhancements, from the more user-friendly online system to the personalized service of field liaisons, will underscore the image of America as a welcoming country offering valuable educational opportunities.

The proposed new student fee is miniscule – less than one half of one percent (0.002% to be precise) of the average tuition costs for a four-year college education.

As long as the student remains enrolled and in status the fee is only required the first time they apply.

Q. How many nonimmigrant students are currently enrolled in SEVIS

SEVIS currently monitors the active records of more than 1 million F, M, and J nonimmigrants and their dependents.

Q. Do these nonimmigrants come from particular countries

The country with the highest number of active students with 103,394 is South Korea, followed by India, China, Japan, Taiwan, Canada, Mexico, Turkey, Thailand, and Saudi Arabia.

Q. Where do these nonimmigrants study in the United States

California, New York, Texas, Massachusetts, Illinois and Florida host 51% of all active nonimmigrant students. 35% of all SEVP certified schools are located in the states of California, New York, Florida, Texas, and Pennsylvania.

Q. Where can I get more information on SEVIS

In anticipation of these rules, information has been placed on the website to assist stakeholders. See the SEVP website at: http://www.ice.gov/sevis/index.htm

House Judiciary to Conduct Series of Immigration Hearings

The House Judiciary Committee Chairman, John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), and Chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), announced that the oversight hearing on the H-2B program will be the first in a series of immigration hearings. The subcommittee and the full committee will conduct several hearings on this issue in the coming weeks.

"Over the past year, it has become clear that we need an immigration system that is fair, legal, and tough," said Conyers. "The Bush administration has lost control of our borders and failed to deliver an immigration system that is good for American families, workers, and businesses. It is time to address those failures.

"The Subcommittee on Immigration is moving forward with a new series of hearings on immigration concerns and legislation," noted subcommittee Chair Rep. Zoe Lofgren. The series will be conducted in coordination with several other House committees and will take place of the course of several weeks. Members are expected to examine a variety of issues regarding immigration.

Enhancements to Student and Exchange Visitor Program Announced

The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has announced today that it has significantly enhanced the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) and, for the first time, is proposing to raise fees to support the improvements.

Millions of students from around the world seek to come to the U.S. to take advantage of our renowned educational system and engage in meaningful cultural exchange. After the events of September 11, 2001, Congress required the Department of Homeland Security to implement a better way of keeping track of international students and exchange visitors. SEVP was the Department's response to that mandate, and for several years has successfully filled that role. However, the ever-increasing number of students and exchange visitors coming to our country has necessitated several upgrades to the program's systems and technologies. Dramatic improvements to the current SEVP program are proposed for implementation in fall 2008.

"U.S. colleges and universities are the envy of the world and accordingly attract as many as a million individuals from overseas who wish to attend," said Julie L. Myers, Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for ICE. "Validating the identity of foreign students, verifying their intentions for entering our country and knowing where they are while they are here is critically important to the security of our country. Today's proposed new rule ensures that America remains a welcoming place for foreign students to study, while enhancing our abilities to protect our national security."

The four major enhancements to SEVP:

The Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS), the database used to track visiting students, will include improved interactive features for school administrators as well as a simplified application process for foreign students hoping to receive an American education;
Local, customized, one-on-one customer support will be provided by new field liaisons;
Additional ICE agents will be assigned to follow up on alerts submitted by school administrators; and
A new recertification process, as mandated by Congress, will maintain the integrity and reputations of participating schools

SEVP proposes to increase its fees to comply with regulatory requirements to periodically review its fee structure and ensure its costs are fully covered; and to enhance its capability to improve national security and counter immigration fraud. Schools currently participating in the program will not be required to pay any additional fees to recertify under the new rule. The proposed fee increases will affect both students and schools:

The rule would double the fee for nonimmigrant students to $200
Most exchange visitor fees would rise from $100 to $180
The fee for au pairs, camp counselors and summer work/travel program participants remains $35
There is no fee for government sponsored exchange visitors
Fee for school certification would rise from $350 to $1,700
Site visit charges would increase from $230 to $655 for each site visit

These changes will ensure that America continues to welcome increasing numbers of international students and exchange visitors while maintaining the integrity of its immigration system and the security of its borders. Over the course of the next two weeks, ICE is intending to meet members of the academic community to highlight program improvements and explain the new fee structure.

Operator of English Language Schools Charged for Allegedly Running Visa Fraud Scheme

In a startling discovery by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a Beverly Hills man who operates two schools that teach English to foreign students was arrested on federal charges for allegedly running a visa fraud scheme that allowed foreign nationals from around the world to obtain student visas to enter the United States, even though they had no intention of attending the schools or were fraudulently trying to remain in the United States.

Behzad "Ben" Zaman, 50, was arrested without incident this morning by special agents with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) at Concord English Language Center, one of the two schools he operates. Zaman is expected to make his initial appearance this afternoon in United States District Court in Los Angeles.

ICE agents also executed search warrants today at the two schools - Concord and International College for English Studies - which are located on Wilshire Boulevard, just west of downtown Los Angeles. The search warrant affidavit alleges that Zaman, in exchange for sizeable cash payments, assisted ineligible foreign nationals in fraudulently obtaining F-1 student visas and kept them enrolled in his schools for extended periods, even though they were not attending classes. The schools purported to have more than 1,000 students in early 2008.

In the words of United States Attorney Thomas P. O'Brien, "This flagrant violation of our immigration laws shows how greed can compromise our national security," he also added, "We welcome legitimate students who want to take advantage of educational opportunities in America. We do not welcome individuals posing as students who have no intention of studying and who simply want to gain access to this country."

The indictment, which was returned by a federal grand jury here yesterday, lists payments for "tuition" from "students" from Uzbekistan and Latvia. According to the affidavit in support of the search warrant, some of those who benefited from the scheme were Russian prostitutes, who obtained student visas after claiming to attend Concord, even though an earlier investigation by the Los Angeles Police Department showed the women had never attended classes at the school.

"The scope of the crimes alleged in this indictment make it one of the largest student visa fraud schemes ever uncovered here on the West Coast," said Robert Schoch, special agent in charge of the ICE office of investigations in Los Angeles. "We need to make it clear that admission to America is not for sale. These schemes not only undermine the integrity of our nation's legal immigration system, they also generate a sizeable amount of illicit income for those involved."

According to the search warrant affidavit, one student who entered the United States in 2001 attended Concord for two months, then advised Zaman she no longer wanted to attend the school. In response, Zaman allegedly told the "student" that he would maintain her status as a foreign student in exchange for $300 a month. Another scenario described in the affidavit involves a Thai national who told ICE agents she paid $2,000 a year to obtain immigration status from International College, even though she did not attend classes there.

The 76-page affidavit also recounts the case of an Indonesian "student" who entered the country on an F-1 visa. The day after arriving in the United States, the student told ICE agents that Zaman advised him he did not have attend classes "if he had other things to do," but he would be reported to immigration authorities if he failed to pay his "tuition." Several other "students" told investigators they paid reduced "tuition" to attend Concord occasionally - or not at all - even though the school reported them as attending full-time and therefore eligible to remain in the United States as "students."

The indictment charges Zaman with seven counts of fraud and misuse of visa, one count of conspiring to money launder and six counts of concealment of money laundering. The 14 counts carry a statutory maximum penalty of 210 years in federal prison.

The F-1 Student Visa Program allows foreign students to study in the United States if certain conditions are met. An ICE examination of the Student Exchange Visitor and Information System (SEVIS) showed that students were "transferred" from Concord to ICES, and vice-versa, without their knowledge. In addition, the court documents conclude that the schools' operations were bogus because both schools purported to have more than 1,000 "students" in early 2008, a number that far exceeded their physical capacity and was not supported by investigators' observations of people actually attending classes.

EOIR declares BIA Pro Bono project as successful

An Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) evaluation of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) Pro Bono Project indicates that the project has been successful in increasing the level and quality of "pro bono" (free of charge) representation for "respondents" (persons in immigration removal proceedings) who appeal their cases to the BIA. The majority of these respondents are detained by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Moreover, based on input from BIA members and staff attorneys, as well as from the private attorneys and members of the non-governmental organizations (NGOs) who participate in the project, the study finds that both respondents and the government benefit from the increased level and quality of legal representation.

Evaluation Findings

The October 2004 evaluation, which reviewed the first 3 years of the BIA Pro Bono Project since its inception in January 2001, found that the project:

Increased the number of respondents with pro bono counsel. Nearly 300 respondents, who would not have had legal counsel otherwise, obtained pro bono legal representation through the BIA Pro Bono Project.
Facilitated the BIA's legal review of cases by increasing the number and enhancing the quality of legal briefs filed in support of BIA appeals. While most "pro se" (self-represented/without legal representation) respondents do not file a brief in support of their appeals, nearly all of the project cases included briefs which clearly articulated the key issues on appeal.
Fostered continuous learning throughout the immigration advocacy community. For example, the project provides real-world educational opportunities to law students who intern in law firms and law clinics that participate in the project.

For complete evaluation of the Pro Bono project by EOIR, click here

Background

Under U.S. law, individuals in immigration proceedings are not provided legal representation by the government. While they may obtain legal representation at their own expense, many times they cannot afford to pay for private legal counsel. EOIR's BIA Pro Bono Project assists several NGOs in their efforts to link volunteer legal representatives nationwide with aliens, most of whom are detained, who have immigration cases on appeal to the BIA and cannot afford legal representation.

The project seeks to remove traditional obstacles private attorneys face in identifying, locating, and communicating with unrepresented aliens by providing EOIR case tracking and summary information to facilitate the initial contact. Generally, the process is as follows:

EOIR identifies certain types of cases for pro bono representation, based upon criteria determined by the NGOs.
NGOs review and summarize the selected cases and then distribute them via e-mail to pro bono representatives throughout the country.
Volunteers who accept a case then receive a copy of the court record and, in most cases, additional time to file the appeal brief.

The Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (CLINIC) has provided critical assistance in coordinating the project with other NGOs, which include the American Immigration Law Foundation, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, the Capital Area Immigrants' Rights Coalition, and the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild. To date, EOIR's NGO partners have recruited more than 350 attorneys, law students, and accredited representatives, and have matched 310 individuals who would not have been represented by counsel, with pro bono legal representation.

The BIA Pro Bono Project is one of three major EOIR Pro Bono Program initiatives that are managed by the EOIR Pro Bono Coordinator with the goal of facilitating access to pro bono legal assistance and creating new incentives for attorneys and law students to take on pro bono cases before the Immigration Courts and the BIA. The other two Pro Bono Program efforts are:

Legal Orientation Program - provides comprehensive briefings about Immigration Court procedures and other basic legal information to detained individuals at seven DHS detention facilities nationwide; and
Unaccompanied Alien Children initiative - a cooperative effort with DHS, the Office of Refugee Resettlement (Department of Health and Human Services), and NGOs to provide pro bono assistance and improve legal services for these children.

For additional information about EOIR's Pro Bono Program click here

Senator Cornyn to chair Senate's Immigration Subcommittee

U.S. Senator John Cornyn will chair the Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship. The subcommittee has jurisdiction over immigration, citizenship, and refugee laws, and oversight of the immigration-related functions of the Department of Homeland Security.

Cornyn, author of the Border Security and Immigration Reform Act of 2003, said “We must address the need for better border security, and combat human smuggling and other exploitation, while acknowledging the important contributions that immigrants make to our economy.”

The Judiciary Committee will ratify Cornyn’s and other committee chairmanships and assignments during an upcoming meeting of the full committee. Cornyn chaired the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights subcommittee in the 108th Congress, and served on these subcommittees: Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship; Administrative Oversight and the Courts; and Crime, Corrections and Victims’ Rights.

Chairman Cornyn’s subcommittee has jurisdiction over immigration, citizenship, and refugee laws and oversight of the immigration-related functions of the Department of Homeland Security, including the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service, the immigration functions of the United States Customs and Border Protection, the United States Immigration and Custom Enforcement and the Directorate of Border and Transportation Security.

The subcommittee’s oversight jurisdiction also includes the immigration-related functions of the Department of Justice, the Department of State, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Refugee Resettlement, and the Department of Labor, and international migration and refugee laws and policy.

For complete text of the Press Release, click here.

ICE means business; Reports record alien removals

Alien Removals Increase by 12,000; Fugitive Alien Apprehensions Climb 112 Percent

The removal of criminal and other illegal aliens from the United States reached record levels, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced today, with 157,281 aliens total removed in Fiscal Year 2004. In addition, ICE recorded a sizable increase in apprehensions under a new program specifically targeting fugitive aliens.

ICE’s Office of Detention and Removal Operations (DRO), responsible for removals of aliens, credited the fiscal year increases with the agency’s more aggressive focus on targeting criminal and fugitive aliens – those who pose the most serious risks to public safety and national security. As the largest investigative agency in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), ICE is responsible for the enforcement of the nation’s immigration and customs laws.

"Removing criminal aliens and other illegal aliens from the United States is critical to the integrity of our immigration system and important to the safety of our communities," said DHS Assistant Secretary for ICE, Michael J. Garcia. "The 9/11 Commission Report details how our immigration system was exploited by terrorists, and we know that other dangerous criminals have sought illegal entry by similar means. We are bringing to bear the full force of our authorities to locate and remove those in the country illegally."

Nearly 53 percent of those removed were criminal aliens – that is, aliens who are eligible for removal based upon a criminal conviction in the United States. ICE removals of criminal aliens reached 82,802 in FY04, an increase of 6.6 percent over the previous fiscal year. Removals of non-criminal aliens increased by over 10 percent to 74,479.

ICE also noted significant gains in apprehending and deporting fugitive aliens – individuals who were ordered deported from the United States but who failed to report for removal – under the National Fugitive Operations Program (NFOP).

From March 1 through Sept. 30, 2003, when ICE began tracking fugitive apprehensions, DRO apprehended 3,409 fugitives with final orders of removal. By comparison, in the same seven-month period of FY04, DRO apprehended 7,239 fugitives with final orders of removal, an increase of 112 percent over the FY03 period. Total FY04 apprehensions of fugitives were 11,063.

EOIR responds to Sacramento Bee article

The Executive Office for Immigration Review, U.S. Department of Justice has criticized the article published by Sacramento Bee, a daily newspaper based at Sacramento, CA. In a letter written to the Editor of the daily, EOIR observes that the article has created erroneous conclusion.

In its article published in September, 2004, the Sacramento daily had commented that “because of changes in the way the U.S. Department of Justice handles immigration cases, federal circuit courts are being buried under a 600 percent increase in deportation and asylum appeals, leading some judges to worry whether they can deliver justice”.

Responding to the article, in its letter dated September 21, 2004 addressed to the City Editor of the daily, the Counsel for Legislative and Public affairs, Executive Office for Immigration Review has stated that “Your recent article ("Immigration Appeals Swamp Federal Courts," Sept. 5) unfortunately failed to accurately descibe our agency's successful implementation of an initiative that is reducing the pending caseload of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). The selective use of information, including discredited analysis from another newspaper, has created an erroneous conclusion that streamlining of the BIA's procedures are shortchanging those who appeal their cases, which is simply not accurate.”

The letter further observes that streamlining of the BIA's procedures began in 1999 under the former Attorney General and was expanded and refined by Attorney General John Ashcroft in 2002. Since then, the pending caseload has been steadily reduced from 56,000 to approximately 32,000 at present, and greatly reduces the time that a respondent must wait for a decision, including those who merit relief from deportation.

The letter ends with the observation that the “BIA Members and attorney staff are dedicated professionals who take their jobs very seriously and recognize the personal implications of the work of the BIA, which is often the last recourse before an individual faces removal”.

To read the complete contents of the letter, please click here.

The EOIR website also provides link to the article published in The Sacramento Bee. To view the article, please click here.

Samenfink heads CBP's Modernization Office

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) today announced the appointment of 26-year CBP veteran Louis Samenfink as executive director of the agency's Modernization Office.

"Louis Samenfink's background in automated systems, international trade, and cargo operations is critical as Customs and Border Protection begins the transition from the current trade processing system to the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE)," said Acting Assistant Commissioner Rod MacDonald, Office of Information and Technology. "He has the expertise necessary to ensure the seamless integration and coordination of CBP modernization with field operations."

As the executive director of the Modernization Office, Samenfink is responsible for implementing CBP’s Modernization Program, a 15-year, multi-billion dollar initiative to modernize and integrate the agency's IT infrastructure. Ultimately, CBP will modernize all automated systems that support the core business processes of the agency, including trade, enforcement, and administration.

Samenfink will continue to shape the cutting-edge technology in the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE), the new CBP technology system for imports, and the agency's first major modernization project. ACE will increase CBP technology capabilities, streamline processes, and generate billions of dollars in government and trade benefits. It is estimated that for every dollar invested, ACE will return $2.69 in benefits to CBP, or $8.3 billion over the expected ACE lifecycle. For the trade community, ACE will return $5.59 for every dollar invested, or a total of $17.2 billion, bringing the combined total to $25.5 billion.

Samenfink has served CBP most recently as the Deputy Director of the Office of Trade Compliance and Facilitation within the Office of Field Operations. In 1987, he was assigned to work on the Automated Commercial System (ACS), CBP's current trade processing system.

EOIR press release on Final Rule implementing St. Cyr Decision

Rule Implements Procedures for Seeking Section 212(c) Relief from Deportation or Removal

FALLS CHURCH, VA – The Attorney General published a final rule in the Federal Register establishing procedures for eligible lawful permanent residents (LPRs) with certain criminal convictions obtained by plea agreements prior to April 1, 1997, to apply for relief from deportation or removal under former section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). This rule becomes effective on October 28, 2004.

This relief is available to eligible individuals who are currently in removal proceedings, who may be placed in removal proceedings, or who have completed immigration proceedings and are under final orders of deportation or removal. It does not apply to those aliens who: have departed the United States and are currently outside the United States; returned illegally to the United States after being issued a final order of deportation or removal; or are present in the United States without having been admitted or paroled.

It is important to note that eligible individuals under final orders of deportation or removal who are still in the United States must apply for this relief by filing a special motion to seek section 212(c) relief with the Immigration Judge or Board of Immigration Appeals, on or before April 26, 2005. Individuals with a pending motion for section 212(c) relief filed before October 28, 2004, are not required to file a new special motion under this rule but are permitted to supplement their motions.

The final rule answered questions raised during the comment period after the proposed rule was published on August 13, 2002. The final rule adopts without substantial change the proposed rule, with a few exceptions – two of which are described below.

! The final retains the Soriano rule and will therefore allow motions that were filed pursuant to the Soriano rule that are still pending before EOIR to be adjudicated and granted if the requirements under the Soriano rule or this final rule are satisfied.

(Note: The Soriano rule preserved section 212(c) eligibility for those whose deportation proceedings began prior to April 24, 1996, the effective date of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA)).

! The final rule adopts the Ninth Circuit decision in Toia v. Fasano, which allows section 212(c) availability to persons who have been convicted of an aggravated felony and were imprisoned for 5 or more years and made plea agreements to criminal offenses prior to November 29, 1990.

(Note: A 1990 amendment to the INA precluded section 212(c) relief to those who have been convicted of an aggravated felony and served a term of imprisonment of at least 5 years. Toia v. Fasano held that this amendment does not apply to those who made plea agreements to criminal offenses prior to November 29, 1990 – the amendment’s enactment date).

Until April 1, 1997, section 212(c) allowed certain LPRs who resided in the United States for at least 7 consecutive years and had become deportable because of a criminal conviction to seek relief to avoid deportation. In considering whether to grant relief under section 212(c), an Immigration Judge would weigh negative factors, such as the severity of the crime, against positive factors, such as the individual’s rehabilitation and ties to the community.

Congress sharply curtailed the availability of section 212(c) relief through provisions of AEDPA and then eliminated this relief altogether in the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA).

On June 25, 2001, the Supreme Court decided in INS v. St. Cyr that LPRs – whose criminal convictions were obtained through plea agreements prior to April 1, 1997 – remain eligible for section 212(c) relief if they would have been eligible for this relief at the time they were convicted. The St. Cyr decision affects pending cases before EOIR and those in Federal court, as well as a potentially large number of individuals who have not yet come before an Immigration Court. This final rule establishes a fair and efficient process to restore section 212(c) relief to those who are eligible as a result of the St. Cyr decision.

The rule is on the Internet at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/a040928c.html

CBP announces staggering arrest numbers using new AntiTerror Technology

Washington D.C. - U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) today announced that biometric identification technology is fully operational within all 136 Border Patrol stations. CBP’s current objective is to have IAFIS technology fully deployed to all Ports of Entry by the end of 2005. The technology, the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System, or IAFIS, enables CBP officers and Border Patrol agents to search fingerprint databases simultaneously using the Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT) and the FBI fingerprint database. It provides rapid identification of individuals with outstanding criminal warrants by electronically comparing a live-scanned fingerprint against a huge nationwide database of previously captured fingerprints.

“This technology helps U.S. Customs and Border Protection shed light on those with criminal backgrounds we could never have identified before,” said U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Robert C. Bonner. "Its implementation is absolutely critical to our priority mission to keep terrorists and terrorist weapons out of the country.”

The IAFIS program began as a pilot in the San Diego Border Patrol Sectors Brown Field Station and the Calexico Port of Entry in August 2001. By the end of 2003, the program had evolved and was installed at 31 Border Patrol Stations and 28 ports of entry.

“Instantaneous and accurate information is the cornerstone of modern law enforcement,” added Bonner. “This system ensures that U.S. Customs and Border Protection is a law enforcement agency for the 21st century.”

From October 1, 2003 through August 31, 2004, CBP Border Patrol agents have arrested: 138 homicide suspects; 67 kidnapping suspects; 226 sexual assault suspects; 431 robbery suspects; 2,342 suspects for assaults of other types; and 4,801 involved with dangerous narcotics as a direct result of IAFIS technology.

EOIR fact sheet on BIA streamlining

BIA Streamlining

On August 23, 2002, the Attorney General issued a Final Rule that restructured the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board). The rule revised the organization and procedures of the Board to enable it to reduce delays in the administrative review process, eliminate the existing backlog of cases, and focus more attention and resources on those cases presenting significant issues for resolution. The following summarizes the status of this initiative to date.

General
The restructuring regulation has been successfully implemented and has allowed the Board to allocate its limited resources to adjudicate the more than 40,000 new appeals and other matters filed annually. The regulation was designed to address extensive backlogs and lengthy delays, which encouraged abuse and delayed decisions to aliens who merited relief from deportation. The pending caseload has been steadily reduced from 56,000 when the restructuring initiative was announced to approximately 32,000 by September 2004.

The regulation expanded the existing streamlined procedures to resolve more cases with single Board Member decisions. Under the restructuring regulation, all cases are adjudicated by a single Board Member unless they fall into one of six specified categories, which are handled by a panel of three Board Members. A single Board Member decision can be quite detailed, while many three Board Member cases can be short and straightforward. Furthermore, the regulation mandates the use of summary affirmances (or affirmances without opinion (AWO) as they are also known) in certain instances. Only about one-third of the Board’s decisions fall into the category of AWO.

Federal courts have rejected every challenge brought against the restructuring regulation. Each circuit has issued a decision holding that the regulation is permissible and does not violate due process. In fact, most, if not all, of the courts where challenges were filed employ similar summary affirmance mechanisms in the interest of efficient, yet effective jurisprudence.

Appeals to the Federal Circuit Courts

It is the rate of appeal (up from an historical 5 percent to close to 25 percent) that primarily accounts for the upsurge in petitions for review in the Federal circuit courts. For example, monthly petitions for review previously numbered about 125, but now range from 1,000 to 1,200 since the new procedures have taken effect. The Board’s increased case completions account for a rise of about 200, and the remaining 800 to 1,000 new filings are due solely to the higher percentage of cases appealed.

Following implementation of the new regulation, the increase in the rate of appeals from Board decisions was attributable, in large measure, to challenges to the restructuring regulation. However, new petitions for review have not dropped off despite the courts’ rejection of challenges to the regulation. There is no evidence that the affirmance and reversal/remand rates of BIA decisions has changed significantly in the wake of the restructuring regulation. This indicates that the quality of the Board’s jurisprudence has remained consistent and unaffected by its increased use of AWOs and single Board Member review as required by the regulation.

A factor which may be contributing to the rise in the rate of appeals is the reduced time involved in completing cases appealed to the Board. Thus, for those aliens who wish to postpone deportation, filing an appeal to the circuit courts may be a much more attractive option than in the past. To the extent that the courts are routinely granting stays of deportation pending their review, the incentive to file an appeal and to request a stay will be high.

Because only the alien, and not the Government, may appeal adverse decisions to the Federal courts, the courts never see cases where an alien has been granted relief.

CBP opens Complaint Processing Center

WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Commissioner Robert C. Bonner announced today the official opening of the new CBP Complaints Processing Center. The Complaints Processing Center is part of the Customs and Border Protection support of the Professionalism Initiative and will be used to streamline and consolidate operating procedures in order to process EEO disputes in a more timely and efficient manner.

When CBP became a unified border agency within the Department of Homeland Security, it became essential to formulate a CBP Complaints Processing Office. Prior to March 1, 2003, U.S. Customs Service complaints were processed by the Department of Treasury. After March 1, 2003, CBP established a Memorandum of Agreement with the Internal Revenue Service for the processing of complaints. CBP was able to establish a Complaints Processing Center with 10 employees, located in Oakland, California, on August 8, 2004.
“As this Nation's first defense in the war on terror, we must protect the individual rights and civil liberties of our workforce and the people we serve. This CBP Complaints Processing Office will help ensure all CBP employee complaints receive the best service to process their complaints.” Commissioner Bonner said. “Our success as an organization is tied directly to the hard work of our employees - men and women with very diverse backgrounds - stationed throughout the world. Having a workforce that represents the pluralism of our Nation and practices the principles of EEO, fairness, and integrity is critical to the protection of our borders and the mission of CBP.”

The commitment to serving our country requires CBP, as an agency, to be in full compliance with our nation's civil rights laws. Not only must CBP employee interactions with the public be nondiscriminatory but also the interactions with each other must be based upon the same principles. Perceived or actual unfair treatment in the workplace can compromise the ability of CBP employees to perform their critical mission.

Last year, CBP received approximately 600 inquiries from employees, with 165 filing formal EEO complaints. In FY 04, to date, over 652 employees have contacted the EEO office for service, with 176 proceeding to file formal complaints. With over 41,000 employees to service, the filing rate per capita is less than .050 percent.

The Complaints Processing Center will focus on ways to expedite the processing of formal complaints and assist in facilitating the resolution of complaints, at the lowest possible level. The Complaints Processing Center is a part of the Equal Employment Opportunity Office within the Office of the Commissioner.

CBP vows a total commitment to Professionalism

Washington, D.C. - U.S. Customs and Border Protection CBP Commissioner Robert C. Bonner today announced an initiative to ensure that the agency and its personnel practice the highest of standards in professionalism.

The CBP Professionalism Initiative calls for a total commitment to exemplary conduct in providing services to travelers, as well as the appropriate use of discretion in dealing with technical immigration violations. The initiative will also ensure that CBP is serving the American public with vigilance and integrity, while providing courteous and helpful treatment to visitors, immigrants, and travelers.

"U.S. Customs and Border Protection is the guardian of this country's borders, but it is also the face of our nation and the U.S. government to all who enter our country," said Commissioner Bonner. "Today, we are implementing standards and policies to ensure the highest degree of professionalism and courtesy at our nation's ports of entry and we are allowing CBP Officers the discretion necessary to resolve technical infractions rapidly, while carrying out their primary mission of preventing terrorists and terrorist weapons from entering the country."

A major part of the Homeland Security reorganization, CBP is a merger of all U.S. Customs, Immigration, and Agriculture inspectors at our nation's 317 ports of entry, along with the entire Border Patrol, which protects our nation's borders between the ports of entry. CBP was created to protect our nation's borders from the threat of terrorism, while continuing the important traditional work of the legacy agencies. To transform the separate inspectional workforces into one, CBP established "One Face at the Border," a unified occupation with the resources, skills and best practices of the separate workforces. CBP adopted a single uniform for its inspectional workforce, conducted anti-terrorism training and cross-training for legacy Customs and Immigration inspectors, and selected a single overtime compensation system. On July 25, 2004, all legacy Customs and Immigration inspectors were converted to a new position: that of "CBP Officer." These historic changes together with a continuous commitment to professionalism will make CBP the most professional law enforcement organization in the nation.

"I expect professionalism and courtesy to be the hallmark of every CBP Officer. It is my goal that all visitors and traveling U.S. citizens see the CBP uniform as a symbol of our Nation's great strength, ideals, and liberty," said Commissioner Bonner.

The principles of professionalism and discretion will be utilized throughout every aspect of the CBP workforce. As part of this initiative, CBP's "Pledge to Travelers" will be prominently displayed at airports, seaports, and land border ports of entry. It states, "We pledge to cordially greet and welcome you to the United States. We pledge to treat you with courtesy, dignity, and respect. We pledge to explain the CBP process to you. We pledge to have a supervisor listen to your comments. We pledge to accept and respond to your comments in written, verbal, or electronic form. We pledge to provide reasonable assistance due to delay or disability."

An important part of professionalism is the appropriate exercise of discretion in determining whether to refuse or permit entry of people attempting to enter the United States. Since the overwhelming majority of travelers pose absolutely no threat to our national security, CBP will use discretion to permit entry, whenever the law allows, for individuals that have committed a technical or inadvertent immigration violation, but who otherwise pose no threat whatsoever. Potential terrorists, those that may be engaged in criminal activity, and those who may add to the illegal population of the United States will be refused entry.

The CBP Professionalism Initiative encompasses training, employee musters, guidance on exercising discretion, the "Pledge to Travelers" campaign, the overhaul of the complaint and compliment processing unit, and the development of metrics to measure agency progress.

"We have a unique opportunity to capitalize on this historic reorganization, and in doing so, develop the culture of professionalism for years to come. We are raising the bar. We are a world class law enforcement organization and even a single instance of rude or discourteous behavior is one too many," Commissioner Bonner added. "At U.S. Customs and Border Protection, as 'One Face at the Border,' we are building a tradition of excellence."

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is the unified border agency within the Department of Homeland Security charged with the management, control, and protection of our Nation's borders at and between the official ports of entry. CBP is charged with keeping terrorists and terrorist weapons out of the country while enforcing hundreds of U.S. laws.

ICE launches First Northern Border Air Marine Branch

Fleet Includes State-of-the-Art Surveillance Aircraft to Increase Border Security

BELLINGHAM, WASHINGTON - In an event today at Bellingham International Airport, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) launched a new initiative to maximize security along the U.S.-Canada border. The Bellingham Air and Marine Branch (AMB) is the first of five planned facilities to augment DHS Northern border security capabilities with air and marine law enforcement, surveillance and airspace security authorities.

At full capacity, the Bellingham AMB will consist of 69 federal law enforcement officers, pilots, aircrew and mission support personnel from the Office of Air and Marine Operations (AMO), a division of ICE. Branch assets include one medium lift helicopter, one light enforcement helicopter, one multi-role enforcement aircraft (Pilatus PC-12), one SAFE boat, and one utility boat. The Bellingham AMB will conduct regular mission patrols and is equipped for rapid incident response.

The initiative at the Northern border is aimed at shutting down narcotics and human smuggling routes and networks that operate along the U.S.-Canada border. The second Northern Border Branch will be established in Plattsburgh, New York, later this year. The remaining three will be located in Montana, North Dakota, and Michigan.

The Bellingham Air Marine Branch adds another layer to Northern border security. With 35 years experience in air and marine law enforcement and interdiction, AMO will employ many of the same enforcement and interdiction capabilities that have been employed for decades along the Southern border, doing so in coordination with U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Canadian authorities, and U.S. state and local law enforcement.

New Multi-Role Enforcement Aircraft and SAFE Boat for Northern Border Showcased.

At the ceremony today, ICE's AMO showcased the newest addition to its fleet of more than 130 aircraft. The Pilatus (PC-12) is a sophisticated single-engine turbo-prop aircraft that will replace the aging C-12 aircraft currently in AMO's fleet.

Equipped with an extensive sensor package, the new Pilatus has short-field take-off and landing capabilities enabling it to deploy rapidly and operate safely in remote areas. For these reasons, the aircraft is particularly well suited for the northern border. As part of its interdiction and border security efforts, ICE's AMO will be deploying the Pilatus at the five sites along the Canadian border.

With a crew of three, the new Pilatus can fly at 270 knots at an altitude of 30,000 feet and with a range of 2,260 miles. The aircraft will substantially enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of AMO operations by reducing operating costs, and by providing increased mission versatility, including air interdiction, aerial surveillance, and logistical support.

ICE AMO added SAFE Boats to its fleet beginning in 2003. SAFE Boats, manufactured in Port Orchard, Washington are fabricated marine-grade aluminum hull vessels, with polyethylene closed cell foam collar. This provides the stability and the buoyancy of a ridged hull inflatable, with an unmatched durability and safety factor.

It is a full-sided boat, with a collar system that cannot deflate and endanger the crew. These features make it ideal for performing missions in rough seas and in areas congested with waterborne debris. Built with a protective cabin area, the vessel has heat and air to protect the crews from the elements. Equipped with three outboard motors, the SAFE boat will enhance AMO's ability to interdict waterborne threats transiting the waters of the Northwest region.

CBP announces Border Patrol Academy

Agents Will be Trained in Centralized State of the Art Facility

Washington, DC — U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Commissioner Robert C. Bonner announced today that the Border Patrol Academy will be consolidated in a state of the art training facility located in Artesia, New Mexico. Currently, new Border Patrol agents are trained in two different locations in Georgia and South Carolina.

“The Border Patrol has one of the most important Homeland Security missions: controlling our nation’s borders, especially the more than 6,000 miles of border with Mexico and Canada,” said U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Robert C. Bonner. “The new Border Patrol Academy, will build a foundation our Border Patrol agents need to meet their anti-terrorism, interdiction and border security mission."

The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) will host the Border Patrol Academy at its Artesia, NM training center. The Border Patrol Academy is responsible for addressing the basic and advanced training needs for more than 11,000 Border Patrol agents nationwide. New Border Patrol agents must complete a rigorous, 19-week training program that includes courses in anti-terrorism, federal Immigration and anti-drug laws, criminal law and statutory Authority, behavioral science, intensive Spanish language training, Border Patrol Operations, care and use of firearms, physical training and motor vehicle operations. The Academy’s New Mexico location provides a unique environment similar to Southwest border where many Border Patrol agents are assigned because of illegal migration and illegal drug smuggling.

“The Border Patrol is an important part of U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The Border Patrol’s primary mission is to gain control of our borders and this has always been important, but in the post 9/11 era, it is essential. So far this year, Border Patrol agents have made over one million arrests and seized over a billion dollars worth of drugs,” said Border Patrol Chief David Aguilar. “The Academy and its instructors provide some of the best law enforcement training in the world. By having the academy in one location, we will be able to more effectively and efficiently provide a professional training environment to new agents that join the CBP Border Patrol family."

U.S. Customs and Border Protection is the unified border agency within the Department of Homeland Security charged with the management, control, and protection of our Nation's borders at and between the official ports of entry. CBP is charged with keeping terrorists and terrorist weapons out of the country while enforcing hundreds of U.S. laws.

CBP Officers directed to enforce law with Common Sense on Visa Waiver Overstayers

Washington, D.C. - U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Commissioner Robert C. Bonner announced today new discretion for CBP officers to grant no-risk travelers who overstayed under the Visa Waiver Program (VWP) on a prior visit a one-time parole. The use of discretion by CBP supervisors will avoid the detention and handcuffing which Commissioner Bonner said was "inappropriate" for minor violations of the Visa Waiver Program.

Commissioner Bonner stated: "A number of situations have come to my attention where CBP officers have denied entry to travelers from Visa Waiver Countries, on their arrival at U.S. airports, because of brief, prior overstays, sometimes just a few days, of the Visa Waiver Program, although these travelers posed no threat whatsoever to the U.S. The consequence of the decision has been that the person has been detained, often overnight, until a flight back to the country from whence they came and handcuffed while transported to and from the detention facility. This treatment is grossly disproportionate to the inadvertent prior overstays. By my action today, I have directed CBP port directors and supervisors to see that parole is granted to permit entry, except where the person poses a threat for terrorism, criminality or is likely to become an economic migrant."

"U.S. Customs and Border Protection is a law enforcement agency, but enforcement must always be tempered with common sense. If individuals are not a potential terrorist threat or criminal threat; nor are likely to contribute to the illegal population, and the overstay was short and inadvertent or for reasons beyond the applicant's control, CBP officers and supervisors have the authority to parole them into the U.S.," added Commissioner Bonner. "Minor violators, who are no threat to the security of the U.S., should not be denied entry and be subject to handcuffing and detention. Granting this authority will help counter the disproportionate impact on travelers who pose no threat to the U.S. The action I have taken in no way lessens our commitment to keep terrorists and terrorist weapons out of the country. In fact, it allows CBP's frontline in the war on terror to remain focused on stopping terrorists and other threats to U.S. security."

The Visa Waiver Program permits nationals from designated countries to apply for admission to the United States for 90 days or less as non-immigrant visitors for business or pleasure without first obtaining a visa. Under the Visa Waiver regulation, those individuals who overstay as part of the Visa Waiver Program must obtain a visa for subsequent visits to the U.S.

With this new authority, CBP port directors and supervisors at ports of entry can grant no-risk travelers who are VWP overstays a one-time parole into the U.S. Parole is granted on a case-by-case basis and those who receive it will be informed of their status as a Visa Waiver overstay and the need to obtain a visa for any future visits to the U.S. This additional discretion will give CBP more control in the field to parole those who pose no risk for terrorism, criminality, or those who will become economic migrants.

Commissioner Bonner cited "the extensive training, dedication and professionalism of CBP officers and their supervisors in the field" as a reason to place more authority in their hands. "I am confident that we can rely on the good judgement of our frontline officers and their supervisors to do what is legal, fair, and necessary to protect the United Sates. We will continue to exercise our discretion to deny entry to anyone who poses a potential terrorist risk or whose purpose for entering appears to be inconsistent with the purposes for visiting permitted by his visa or the Visa Waiver Program. Travelers whose intent is to violate our laws are the individuals that CBP will concentrate on," Bonner said.

Commissioner Bonner's memorandum to the field stated that CBP's failure to admit certain visitors without formal approval "is causing and will continue to cause significant public detriment to the United States" and that "under the limited circumstances such disproportionately harsh treatment warrants a modification of CBP policy. I have concluded that there is an urgent humanitarian reason and a significant public benefit in granting parole where an individual seeking admission under the Visa Waiver Program poses no risk whatsoever."

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is the unified border agency within the Department of Homeland Security charged with the management, control, and protection of our Nation's borders at and between the official ports of entry. CBP is charged with keeping terrorists and terrorist weapons out of the country while enforcing hundreds of U.S. laws.

CBP gets another weapon in its armor; Expedited Removal Authorization

SUMMARY: This notice authorizes the Department of Homeland Security to place in expedited removal proceedings any or all members of the following class of aliens: Aliens determined to be inadmissible under sections 212(a)(6)(C) or (7) of the Immigration and Nationality Act who are present in the U.S. without having been admitted or paroled following inspection by an immigration officer at a designated port-of- entry, who are encountered by an immigration officer within 100 air miles of the U.S. international land border, and who have not established to the satisfaction of an immigration officer that they have been physically present in the U.S. continuously for the fourteen- day (14-day) period immediately prior to the date of encounter. DHS believes that exercising its statutory authority to place these individuals in expedited removal proceedings will enhance national security and public safety by facilitating prompt immigration determinations, enabling DHS to deal more effectively with the large volume of persons seeking illegal entry, and ensure removal from the country of those not granted relief, while at the same time protecting the rights of the individuals affected. DATES: This notice is effective on August 11, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Please submit written comments to: Regulations Branch, Office of Regulations and Rulings, Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20229. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for more details on submission of comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dana E. Graydon, Acting Associate Chief, Office of Border Patrol, U.S. Customs and Border Protection,1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Suite 6.5-E, Washington, DC 20229, dana.graydon@dhs.gov, 202-344-3153.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Please submit written comments, original and two copies, to the address listed above on or before after October 12, 2004. Submitted comments may be inspected at the Office of Regulations and Rulings, Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, 799 9th Street, NW., Washington, DC, during regular business hours. Arrangements to inspect submitted comments should be made in advance by calling Mr. Joseph Clark at (202) 572-8768.

Section 302 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), Public Law 104-208, Div. C, 110 Stat. 3009-546, amended section 235(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act ("Act"), 8 U.S.C. 1225(b), to authorize the Attorney General (now the Secretary of Homeland Security as designated under the Homeland Security Act of 2002) to remove, without a hearing before an immigration judge, aliens arriving in the U.S. who are inadmissible under sections 212(a)(6)(C) or 212(a)(7) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(6)(C) and 1182(a)(7). Under section 235(b)(1) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1), expedited removal proceedings may be applied to two categories of aliens. First, section 235(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)(A)(i), permits expedited removal proceedings for aliens who are "arriving in the United States.'' "Arriving aliens'' are defined by regulation to mean "an applicant for admission coming or attempting to come into the United States at a port-of-entry, or an alien seeking transit through the United States at a port-of-entry, or an alien interdicted in international waters and brought into the United States by any means whether or not to a designated port-of- entry.'' (8 CFR 1.1(q)). Cuban citizens who arrive at U.S. ports-of- entry by aircraft are exempted from this first category of aliens subject to expedited removal under section 235(b)(1)(F) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)(F). Second, section 235(b)(1)(A)(iii) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)(A)(iii), permits the Attorney General (now the Secretary of Homeland Security), in his or her sole and unreviewable discretion, to designate certain other aliens to whom the expedited removal provisions may be applied. Section 235(b)(1)(A)(iii), 8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)(A)(iii), authorizes the Secretary to apply (by designation) expedited removal proceedings to aliens who arrive in, attempt to enter, or have entered the U.S. without having been admitted or paroled following inspection by an immigration officer at a designated port-of- entry, and who have not established to the satisfaction of the immigration officer that they have been physically present in the U.S. continuously for the two-year period immediately prior to the date of determination of inadmissibility.

By statute, an alien present in the U.S. who has not been admitted shall be deemed for purposes of the Act to be an applicant for admission. 8 U.S.C. 1225(a), section 235(a)(1) of the Act. Once alienage has been established, an alien applicant for admission has the burden of establishing that he or she is clearly and beyond doubt entitled to be admitted and is not inadmissible under section 212 of this Act. Aliens who have not been admitted or paroled and who are subject to expedited removal under this designation have the burden of proof to show affirmatively that they are not inadmissible and have maintained the required continuous physical presence in the U.S. Any absence from the U.S. shall serve to break the period of continuous physical presence. 8 CFR 235.3(b)(1)(ii).

Pursuant to 8 CFR 235.3(b)(1)(ii) (62 FR 10312, 10355, March 6, 1997), the Attorney General provided that her designation authority would be exercised by the Commissioner of the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). Pursuant to sections 102(a), 441, 1512(d) and 1517 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107-296, 116 Stat. 2310, 6 U.S.C. 112, 251, 552(d), 557, and 8 CFR 2.1, the authority of the Attorney General and the Commissioner of the INS in accordance with 8 U.S.C. 235(b)(1)(A)(iii) and 8 CFR 235.3(b)(1)(ii), respectively, was transferred to the Secretary of Homeland Security, and references to the Attorney General or the Commissioner in the statute and regulations are deemed to refer to the Secretary.

DHS has a pressing need to improve the security and safety of the nation's land borders, and expanding expedited removal between ports of entry will provide DHS officers with a valuable tool to meet that objective. Presently DHS officers cannot apply expedited removal procedures to the nearly 1 million aliens who are apprehended each year in close proximity to the borders after illegal entry. It is not logistically possible for DHS to initiate formal removal proceedings against all such aliens. This is primarily a problem along the southern border, and thus the majority of such aliens are Mexican nationals, who are "voluntarily'' returned to Mexico without any formal removal order. Based upon anecdotal evidence, many of those who are returned to Mexico seek to reenter the U.S. illegally, often within 24 hours of being voluntarily returned (it is not uncommon for DHS officers to apprehend the same individual many times over a span of several months). On the southern land border with Mexico, those aliens who are apprehended who are not Mexican nationals cannot be returned to Mexico. Currently, non-Mexican nationals who are inadmissible may be voluntarily returned to their country of citizenship or nationality via aircraft, or placed in formal removal proceedings under section 240 of the Act. Because DHS lacks the resources to detain all third-country nationals (aliens who are neither nationals of Mexico nor Canada) who have been apprehended after illegally crossing into the U.S. from both the northern and southern land borders, many of these aliens are released in the U.S. each year with a notice to appear for removal proceedings. Many of these aliens subsequently fail to appear for their removal proceedings, and then disappear in the U.S.

Without limiting its ability to exercise its discretion in the event of a national emergency, other unforeseen events, or a change in circumstances, DHS plans under this designation as a matter of prosecutorial discretion to apply expedited removal only to (1) third- country nationals and (2) to Mexican and Canadian nationals with histories of criminal or immigration violations, such as smugglers or aliens who have made numerous illegal entries. We recognize that certain aliens, including unaccompanied minors, members of the Class Action Settlement in American Baptist Churches v. Thornburgh, 760 F. Supp. 796 (N.D. Cal. 1991) (which settled the claims of a class of Salvadorans and Guatemalans regarding handling of asylum claims), and aliens who may be eligible for cancellation of removal under section 240A of the Act,

for example, may possess equities that weigh against the use of expedited removal proceedings. Accordingly, in appropriate circumstances and as an exercise of prosecutorial discretion, officers will be able to permit certain aliens described in this notice to return voluntarily, withdraw their application for admission, or to be placed into regular removal proceedings under section 240 of the Act in lieu of expedited removal proceedings.

In the interests of focusing enforcement resources upon unlawful entries that have a close spatial and temporal nexus to the border, this notice does not implement the full nationwide expedited removal authority available to DHS pursuant to section 235 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1225. Nor does this notice limit DHS from implementing the full nationwide enforcement authority of the statute through publication of a subsequent Federal Register notice. The statute provides DHS with the authority to apply expedited removal to aliens who cannot establish that they have maintained a physical presence in the U.S. continuously for the two-year period immediately prior to the date of determination of inadmissibility. The statute also does not limit geographically the application of expedited removal. At this time, DHS has elected to assert and implement only that portion of the authority granted by the statute that bears close temporal and spatial proximity to illegal entries at or near the border. Accordingly, this notice applies only to aliens encountered within 14 days of entry without inspection and within 100 air miles of any U.S. international land border.

It is anticipated under this designation that expedited removal will be employed against those aliens who are apprehended immediately proximate to the land border and have negligible ties or equities in the U.S. Nevertheless, this designation extends to a 100-mile operational range because many aliens will arrive in vehicles that speedily depart the border area, and because other recent arrivals will find their way to near-border locales seeking transportation to other locations within the interior of the U.S. The 100-mile range already has been established by regulation as a reasonable distance from the external boundary of the U.S. for the purpose of preventing the illegal entry of aliens into the U.S. See section 287(a)(3) of the Act; 8 CFR 287.1(a)(2) and (c).

The use of expedited removal orders, which prohibit reentry for a period of 5 years, will deter unlawful entry, and make it possible to pursue future criminal prosecution against those aliens who continue to enter the U.S. in violation of law. It will also accelerate the processing of inadmissible aliens because it generally does not require an appearance before an immigration judge, except in certain circumstances. Deterring future entries and accelerating removals will enhance DHS's ability to oversee the border, and to focus its resources on threats to public safety and to national security. DHS also believes that the use of expedited removal will likely interfere with human trafficking and alien smuggling operations, which are growing in sophistication, and which induce aliens from all over the world to cross the country's borders. Alien smuggling organizations have been responsible for numerous violent crimes, including homicide, hostage- taking, and crimes involving sexual exploitation. DHS expects that the expansion of expedited removal under this notice will ultimately reduce the number of aliens who risk injury or death attempting to enter the U.S. through difficult mountainous and desert terrain, as well as decrease property crimes in border areas.

All aliens placed into expedited removal as a result of this designation will have the same rights to a credible fear screening by an asylum officer, and the right to review of an adverse credible fear determination by an immigration judge, that are provided to arriving aliens who are currently placed into expedited removal after being denied admission at a port of entry. Any alien who falls within this designation, who is placed in expedited removal proceedings, and who indicates an intention to apply for asylum or who asserts a fear of persecution or torture will be interviewed by an asylum officer who will determine whether the alien has a credible fear as defined in section 235(b)(1)(B)(v) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)(B)(v). If that standard is met, the alien will be referred to an immigration judge for a removal proceeding under section 240 of the Act, sections 235(b)(1)(A)(ii) and (B) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)(A)(ii) and (B); 8 CFR 235.3(b)(4). The Forms I-867A and I-867B currently used by officers who process aliens under the expedited removal program provide to all aliens in expedited removal proceedings information concerning the credible fear interview, in accordance with the statutory requirement at section 235(b)(1)(B)(iv) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)(B)(iv). The forms require that the officer inquire whether the alien has any reason to fear harm if returned to his or her country. Officers authorized to administer the expedited removal program will be trained to be alert for any verbal or non-verbal indications that the alien may be afraid to return to his or her homeland.

Similarly, all aliens placed into expedited removal as a result of this designation, who claim lawful permanent resident, refugee, asylee status, or U.S. citizenship will receive the same procedures, including the right to review of any adverse expedited removal order by an immigration judge, that are provided to arriving aliens making similar status claims who are currently placed in expedited removal at ports of entry under 8 CFR 235.3(b). DHS, with limited exceptions, plans to detain aliens who are placed in expedited removal under this designation. Section 235(b)(1)(B)(iii)(IV) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)(B)(iii)(IV), and 8 CFR 235.3(b)(2)(iii) direct that any alien who is placed in expedited removal proceedings shall be detained pending a final determination of credible fear and, if found not to have such a fear, such alien shall be detained until removed. Parole of such alien under 8 CFR 235.3(b)(2)(iii) may be permitted only when the Secretary determines, in the exercise of discretion, that parole is required to meet a medical emergency or is necessary for a legitimate law enforcement objective. Section 235(b)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)(B)(ii), directs that if a credible fear has been established, the alien shall be detained for further consideration of the protection claim or claims. Under Department of Justice regulations, immigration judge review of custody determinations is permitted only for bond and custody determinations pursuant to section 236 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1226, 8 CFR 1236, and 8 CFR 1003.19(a). Aliens subject to expedited removal procedures under section 235 of the Act (including those aliens who are referred after a positive credible fear determination to an immigration judge for proceedings under section 240 of the Act) are not eligible for bond, and therefore are not eligible for a bond redetermination before an immigration judge. Parole of aliens determined to have a credible fear may be considered in accordance with section 212(d)(5) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5), and 8 CFR 212.5.

The expedited removal authority implemented in this Notice will not be employed against Cuban citizens because removals to Cuba cannot presently be assured and for other U.S. policy reasons. The Department has determined that good cause exists under the

Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) and (d)(3), to exempt this notice from the notice and comment requirements under the APA. Delaying the implementation of this notice to allow public notice and comment would be impracticable, unnecessary and contrary to the public interest.

Congress explicitly authorized the Secretary of Homeland Security to designate categories of aliens to whom expedited removal proceedings may be applied, and made clear that "[s]uch designation shall be in the sole and unreviewable discretion of the Secretary and may be modified at any time.'' Section 235(b)(1)(A)(iii)(1) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)(A)(iii)(I). The large volume of illegal entries, and attempted illegal entries, and the attendant risks to national security presented by these illegal entries, necessitates that DHS expand the expedited removal program as provided in this designation. DHS is confident that the experience gained through implementation of the expedited removal program at ports of entry will enable DHS to expand the program in a manner that is both effective and humane.

There is an urgent need to enhance DHS's ability to improve the safety and security of the nation's land borders, as well as the need to deter foreign nationals from undertaking dangerous border crossings, and thereby prevent the needless deaths and crimes associated with human trafficking and alien smuggling operations. The expansion of expedited removal will increase the deterrence of illegal entries by ensuring that apprehension quickly leads to removal. This is especially critical because of the environmental dangers faced by aliens illegally entering the U.S. across desert or mountainous areas. In the Arizona desert alone, since the initiation of the Arizona Border Control Initiative (ABC) in March of 2004, the Border Patrol has rescued hundreds of aliens in distress and has unfortunately discovered over 40 aliens who have died in the attempt to enter the U.S.

This designation is necessary to remove quickly from the U.S. aliens who are encountered shortly after illegally entering the U.S. across the land borders. The ability to detain aliens while admissibility and identity is determined and protection claims are adjudicated, as well as to quickly remove aliens without protection claims or claims to lawful status, is a necessity for national security and public safety. As a critical element of a number of DHS initiatives to enhance security along the border, the expansion of expedited removal will increase national security, diminish the number of illegal entries, and impair the ability of smuggling organizations to operate. Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, the Department has determined that public notice and comment prior to promulgation of this notice would be impracticable, unnecessary and contrary to the public interest as those terms are used under the APA.

Although the Department believes for the foregoing reasons that pre-promulgation notice and comment procedures are not statutorily mandated in this case, DHS is interested in receiving comments from the public on all aspects of the expedited removal program, but especially on the effectiveness of the program, problems envisioned by the commenters, and suggestions on how to address those problems. DHS believes that by maintaining a dialogue with interested parties, DHS can ensure that the program is even more effective in combating and deterring illegal entry, while at the same time protecting the rights of the individuals affected.

The expansion of expedited removal under this notice will also support the Arizona Border Control Initiative (ABC), a program designed to secure and protect the Arizona border. Working with other Federal, State, local and tribal entities, DHS has placed significant personnel and technical assets on the border to decrease the deaths of illegal immigrants in the desert; and to lower the rate of violent crime related to illegal border traffic in Southern Arizona. The ABC began operations in March 2004. For the reasons stated above, the ABC's success will rely in part upon the ability of DHS officers to place inadmissible aliens apprehended shortly after illegal entry into expedited removal.

Every year, illegal aliens from many different countries continue to enter the U.S. illegally across the nation's land borders. It is critical for public safety and national security that these aliens are not released into the U.S. without adequate verification of their identities and backgrounds.

Notice of Designation of Aliens Subject to Expedited Removal Proceedings

Pursuant to section 235(b)(1)(A)(iii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act ("Act") and 8 CFR 235.3(b)(1)(ii), I order as follows:

(1) Except as provided in paragraph (5), the Department of Homeland Security, through its component bureaus, may place in expedited removal proceedings any or all members of the following class of aliens: Aliens who are inadmissible under sections 212(a)(6)(C) or (7) of the Act, who are physically present in the U.S. without having been admitted or paroled following inspection by an immigration officer at a designated port-of-entry, who are encountered by an immigration officer within 100 air miles of any U.S. international land border, and who have not established to the satisfaction of an immigration officer that they have been physically present in the U.S. continuously for the 14-day period immediately prior to the date of encounter. Each alien subject to this notice bears the affirmative burden to show to the satisfaction of an immigration officer that the alien has been present in the U.S. continuously for the relevant 14-day period. This notice does not apply to aliens who arrive at U.S. ports-of-entry, as these aliens are already subject to expedited removal. This notice will be given effect only with respect to apprehensions made within the CBP Border Patrol sectors of (Laredo, McAllen, Del Rio, Marfa, El Paso, Tucson, Yuma, El Centro, San Diego, Blaine, Spokane, Havre, Grand Forks, Detroit, Buffalo, Swanton, and Houlton).

(2) Any alien who falls within this designation who indicates an intention to apply for asylum or who asserts a fear of persecution or torture will be interviewed by an asylum officer to determine whether the alien has a credible fear as defined in section 235(b)(1)(B)(v) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)(B)(v). If that standard is met, the alien will be referred to an immigration judge for proceedings under section 240 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1229a.

(3) Any alien who is placed in expedited removal proceedings under this designation who claims lawful permanent resident, refugee, asylee status, or U.S. citizenship will be processed in accordance with the procedures provided in 8 CFR 235.3(b) and 8 CFR 1235.3(b).

(4) Any alien who is placed in expedited removal proceedings under this designation will be detained pursuant to section 235(b) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1225(b), with certain exceptions, until removed. However, aliens determined to have a credible fear may be considered by DHS for parole in accordance with section 212(d)(5) of the Act and 8 CFR 212.5. Aliens detained pursuant to the expedited removal provisions under section 235 of the Act (including those aliens who are referred after a positive credible fear determination to an immigration judge for proceedings under section 240 of the Act) are not eligible for bond, and therefore are not eligible for a bond

redetermination before an immigration judge. (5) This notice applies to aliens described in paragraph (1) who are encountered within the U.S. beginning August 11, 2004. (6) The expedited removal proceedings contemplated by this notice will not be initiated against Cuban citizens or nationals.

Dated: August 3, 2004. Tom Ridge, Secretary of Homeland Security. [FR Doc. 04-18469 Filed 8-10-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4820-02-P

USAID Announces Business Transformation Results Report

WASHINGTON, DC - The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) released a report on its business transformation achievements on August 9, 2004 in parallel to a government wide release of similar reports by each Cabinet department and major agency and the Office of Management and Budget published a governmentwide report at www.results.gov.

"USAID's business transformation report is a summary of our management reforms and results-oriented achievements over the past three years, said Deputy Administrator Frederick W. Schieck "Our reforms, which directly support the goals of the President's Management Agenda, are laying a solid foundation for this Agency to meet the challenges of the future."

The report was prepared to inform USAID employees, members of Congress, business partners, and U.S. taxpayers about the Agency's business transformation results and benefits.

Under the guidance of the Agency's Business Transformation Executive Committee (BTEC), USAID's management reform achievements include:

Received first ever clean audit opinion on Agency financial statements that demonstrates transparent and accountable financial practices.
Achieved over 25% improvement in employee satisfaction with administrative services as a result of management reforms.
Launched comprehensive human capital strategy and Development Readiness Initiative to identify and close critical skill gaps, revitalize the workforce and enhance Agency performance.
Deploying a new financial management system and new procurement software overseas to enhance decision-making and enable fast and accountable transactions.
Allocated funds to countries with the most need and the highest commitment through strategic budgeting. Re-allocated $30 million to higher performing, higher need programs after an internal program performance assessment.
Saving over $5 million in taxpayers funds through joint licensing agreements as a result of the Joint Financial Management System collaboration with State Department. Enhancing knowledge management systems and methods to capture and share development expertise and new ideas.
Saved $836,000 in taxpayer funds through on-line training, enabling Agency employees to complete nearly 2000 web-based courses to enhance job performance. Trained nearly 1000 employees on Executive and Senior Leadership to enhance career development opportunities.
Better aligning staff with foreign policy priorities with a new overseas staffing template - 21 positions moving to Asia and Near East programs.
Streamlined and automated the Agency's recruitment process reducing the hiring cycle from 229 days to less than 45 days from job announcement to employee selection.

For more information about USAID, please visit our website at www.usaid.gov

Asylum officers' libido and lust leads him to conviction

WASHINGTON D.C.- The Justice Department today announced that a federal jury in Los Angeles convicted Thomas A. Powell Jr., an Immigration and Naturalization Service asylum officer, on corruption and civil rights charges.

Powell was convicted of using his power as an asylum officer to victimize two Chinese women in 2000. In one incident, he touched a female immigrant through her clothes and demanded sexual favors in exchange for recommending approval of her asylum application. She rejected his sexual advances, and her application for asylum was subsequently denied. In a second incident, Powell solicited and received a $2,000 bribe from another female immigrant who was seeking political asylum. In exchange for the bribe, Powell recommended approval of the asylum application.

"The American people place their trust in the professionalism of public officials. Government officials who abuse their authority to prey on others dishonor our country and their fellow civil servants who serve it with dignity and compassion," said R. Alexander Acosta, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. "This conviction sends a clear message that we will not tolerate misuse of power by those who hold a public trust."

"The Civil Rights Section in my office is committed to protecting the rights of all residents," said Debra W. Yang, United States Attorney for the Central District of California. "We are also committed to aggressively prosecuting those who violate this nation's civil rights laws, particularly those who abuse their positions of authority."

Powell faces a maximum of 31 years in federal prison. Sentencing is scheduled to occur on November 22, 2004.

This case was investigated by the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Inspector General. It was jointly prosecuted by attorneys from Civil Rights Division and the United States Attorney's Office for the Central District of California.