82 FR 41867 - Waiver of Passport and Visa Requirements Due to an Unforeseen Emergency
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 170 (September 5, 2017)
Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 170 (September 5, 2017)
| Page Range | 41867-41873 | |
| FR Document | 2017-18749 |
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 170 (Tuesday, September 5, 2017)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 41867-41873] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2017-18749] [[Page 41867]] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 8 CFR Part 212 RIN 1651-AA97 [USCBP-2016-0006; CBP Decision No. 17-10] Waiver of Passport and Visa Requirements Due to an Unforeseen Emergency AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, DHS. ACTION: Final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: This rule adopts as final proposed amendments to the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) regulations describing the procedures for issuance of a discretionary waiver, on the basis of unforeseen emergency in individual cases, of certain documentary requirements for individuals seeking admission to the United States as a nonimmigrant. The Department of State (DOS) is issuing a parallel final rule amending a similar DOS regulation published in today's edition of the Federal Register. DHS and DOS have acted jointly in this matter. DATES: This rule is effective October 5, 2017. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph O'Donnell, Fines, Penalties and Forfeitures, Office of Field Operations, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, telephone number (202) 344-1691, or by email at [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of State, acting jointly, in specified situations, may waive certain documentary requirements (i.e., an unexpired passport and, if required, a valid unexpired visa) for individuals seeking admission to the United States as nonimmigrants.\1\ See section 212(d)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)); see also section 212(a)(7)(B)(i) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(7)(B)(i)) (describing documentary requirements for nonimmigrants). One of these situations is where the agencies determine in individual cases that the nonimmigrant is unable to present the required documents due to an unforeseen emergency. See section 212(d)(4)(A) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(A)). Regulations governing issuance of unforeseen emergency waivers are set forth at 8 CFR 212.1(g). DOS has similar implementing regulations. See 22 CFR 41.2(i). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Previously, the Attorney General acting jointly with the Secretary of State was authorized to waive the documentary requirements due to an unforeseen emergency. However, pursuant to the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135 (HSA), as of March 1, 2003, functions of the legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) of the Department of Justice and the legacy U.S. Customs Service of the Department of the Treasury were transferred to DHS. Specifically, pursuant to sections 102(a), 441, 1512(d) and 1517 of the HSA and 8 CFR 2.1, the authorities of the Attorney General, as described in section 212 of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182), were transferred to the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the reference to the Attorney General in the statute is deemed to refer to the Secretary. Thus, the waiver authority in section 212(d)(4) of the INA now resides with the Secretary of Homeland Security acting jointly with the Secretary of State. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- On March 8, 2016, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register (81 FR 12032) proposing to amend 8 CFR 212.1(g). The NPRM provided a 60-day public comment period. In the NPRM, CBP proposed to reinstate a 1996 amendment to 8 CFR 212.1(g) that was invalidated by court order in United Airlines, Inc. v. Brien, 588 F.3d 158 (2d Cir. 2009). The court invalidated the 1996 amendment on procedural grounds because the legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) did not coordinate with DOS in amending the regulation in violation of the joint action requirement under section 212(d)(4)(A) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(A)). United Airlines, 588 F.3d at 179. Among other things, the 1996 amendment would have removed certain language from 8 CFR 212.1(g) that precluded DHS from assessing carrier fines under section 273 of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1323) when an ``unforeseen emergency'' waiver had been granted under section 212(d)(4)(A) of the INA and 8 CFR 212.1(g). Section 273 of the INA makes it unlawful for a carrier to bring to the United States any alien who does not have a valid passport and an unexpired visa, if a visa was required under the INA or the regulations issued thereunder, and subjects the carrier to a fine for violating this provision. The 1996 amendment of 8 CFR 212.1(g) would have removed the phrase that a visa and passport ``are not required'' if legacy INS (now CBP) concluded that the nonimmigrant was unable to present the required documents because of an unforeseen emergency. The NPRM proposed to reinstate the 1996 amendment by removing the phrase ``are not required'' so that CBP could assess carrier fines under section 273 of the INA in appropriate cases notwithstanding that an ``unforeseen emergency'' waiver has been granted under section 212(d)(4)(A) of the Act and 8 CFR 212.1(g).\2\ The NPRM also proposed to amend 8 CFR 212.1(g) by reinstating 2002 and 2007 amendments to 8 CFR 212.1(g) that were also invalidated as a result of the court order in United Airlines.\3\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ CBP would not apply a fine if CBP granted the waiver and did not revoke it prior to the nonimmigrant alien's boarding. \3\ The INS amended the regulation in 2002 to update documentary requirements, and DHS amended the regulation in 2007 to include U nonimmigrants among those who could seek a waiver. See 67 FR 71443 (Dec. 2, 2002) and 72 FR 53014 (Sept. 17, 2007). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Further background information is provided in the NPRM. On March 8, 2016, DOS published a parallel NPRM proposing amendment of 22 CFR 41.2(i). See 81 FR 12050. Discussion of Comments DHS received eleven comments on this rule. Two comments favored the proposed amendments, and two did not. The remaining comments criticized U.S. immigration policy or aspects of the regulation that were unchanged and are outside the scope of this rulemaking. A summary of the relevant issues raised in the comments and CBP's responses are set forth below. Comment Two commenters said that the proposed regulation did not clearly specify what constitutes an ``unforeseen emergency'' under 8 CFR 212.1(g). One of these commenters recommended the addition of more details about the criteria for qualifying for the unforeseen emergency waiver. The other commenter requested an explanation of the phrase ``unforeseen emergency'' and was concerned about the ``lack of substantial definitions on key terms.'' [[Page 41868]] CBP Response The proposed regulation permits the CBP district director \4\ to grant an unforeseen emergency waiver on an individual case-by-case basis in the exercise of his or her discretion based on the circumstances presented. CBP has determined that this discretionary case-by-case approach is preferable to establishing a specific definition of or criteria for establishing an unforeseen emergency because it is impossible to define or forecast all the various circumstances that could arise that might justify an unforeseen emergency waiver. CBP also has concluded that the inclusion of a definition or the criteria for determining an unforeseen emergency in the regulation would be too limiting. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ The DHS regulation at 8 CFR 1.2 defines ``district director'' broadly. It specifies that to the extent that authority has been delegated to such official, it means asylum office director; director, field operations; district director for interior enforcement; district director for services; field office director; service center director; or special agent in charge. It further specifies that term means such other official, including an official in an acting capacity, within CBP or another DHS component who is delegated the function or authority above for a particular geographic district, region, or area. In determining eligibility for an unforeseen emergency waiver under 8 CFR 212.1(g), the term ``district director'' would encompass the CBP port director for the port where the nonimmigrant is seeking admission to the United States. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment One commenter stated that in now proposing parallel amendments to their respective regulations, CBP and DOS have satisfied the joint action requirement. This same commenter indicated that the proposed amendment is inconsistent with the decision in United Airlines to uphold the Board of Immigration Appeals' (BIA) longstanding rule that a carrier may not be fined under section 273 for having brought an alien to the United States if that alien receives an unforeseen emergency visa waiver. Another commenter stated that it was unclear how the Government could waive passport/visa requirements and yet retain the ability to fine airline carriers for such transport. CBP Response CBP agrees that DHS and DOS have satisfied the joint action requirement under section 212(d)(4)(A) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(A)) by proposing and now issuing parallel regulations. CBP disagrees that this rule is inconsistent with the decision in United Airlines. In United Airlines, the court considered the validity of the BIA rule interpreting the pre-1996 version of 8 CFR 212.1(g). See 588 F.3d at 169-70. By way of background, section 273(a)(1) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1323(a)(1)) makes it unlawful for a carrier to bring to the United States any alien who does not have a valid passport and an unexpired visa, if a visa was required under the INA or the regulations issued thereunder. Because the pre-1996 version of 8 CFR 212.1(g) specified that a visa and a passport are not required if a nonimmigrant demonstrates an unforeseen emergency, the BIA concluded that a carrier could not be fined pursuant to section 273 when an unforeseen emergency waiver was granted under 8 CFR 212.1(g).\5\ See id. at 163. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\ The court also upheld legacy INS's decision to parole aliens arriving in the United States without proper documents rather than granting them a waiver, thereby preserving INS's ability to fine the carrier under section 273 of the INA. See United Airlines, 588 F.3d at 174. For further explanation about parole, see infra note 7. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- However, in 1996, legacy INS amended 8 CFR 212.1(g) to remove the language that a passport and visa are not required if a nonimmigrant demonstrates an unforeseen emergency. See 61 FR 11717. Subsequently, the BIA, applying the 1996 version of the regulation, held that a carrier was subject to a fine for bringing an alien passenger to the United States without a valid nonimmigrant visa even though the passenger was subsequently granted a post-arrival waiver of the visa document requirement. See Matter of Finnair Flight AY103, 23 I&N Dec. 140 (BIA 2001). Therefore, this final rule, which allows CBP to waive passport and/ or visa requirements for a nonimmigrant due to an unforeseen emergency yet still retain the authority to fine the carrier for transporting an alien to the United States without proper documentation, is consistent with the relevant BIA precedent and United Airlines. In fact, the court in United Airlines explicitly sanctioned the approach taken by this final rule. The court stated that if the INS (now CBP) finds that application of the BIA's interpretation of section 273 creates a disincentive for airlines to make a reasonable, good faith effort to ensure that every alien has the requisite travel and entry documents prior to arrival in the United States, it may amend the regulations so that a post-arrival waiver does not nullify the documentary requirements of section 212(a)(7)(B) of the INA. See United Airlines, 588 F.3d at 173. Comment Two commenters expressed the view that the rule would create an economic incentive for carriers to comply with section 273. One commenter stated that unless a carrier would receive more than $4,300 to transport an alien into the United States without proper documentation, the carrier would be disincentivized to provide such transportation due to the possibility of a $4,300 fine under section 273.\6\ This commenter stated that CBP's authority to assess carrier fines in such cases would force airlines and other small entities to implement more stringent practices regarding whom they transport to the United States. This commenter supported Alternative 1, the chosen proposal, which was described in the NPRM as allowing CBP to waive the requirement for individuals seeking admission as nonimmigrants to present valid documentation for entry into the United States in an unforeseen emergency while retaining the authority to fine carriers under section 273. This commenter indicated that Alternative 2, described in the NPRM as the same as Alternative 1 but with a waiver of the penalty for small entities, would remove the economic incentive to comply with section 273 and create an unnecessary safety risk. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ Pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015, Public Law 114-74 (Nov. 2, 2015), on July 1, 2016, DHS issued a rule that adjusted the fine from $4,300 to $5,345 to account for inflation. See 81 FR 42987. The adjusted penalty amount became effective for penalties assessed after August 1, 2016 whose associated violation occurred after November 2, 2015. On January 27, 2017, DHS further adjusted the penalty amount for inflation from $5,345 to $5,432 for penalties assessed after January 27, 2017 whose associated violation occurred after November 2, 2015. See 82 FR 8571. Pursuant to this Act, the penalty amount will be adjusted every year. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Another commenter stated that CBP's ability to assess carrier fines, regardless of whether the undocumented passenger received a waiver, would provide an economic incentive for carriers to adhere to section 273 and dissuade carriers from attempting to determine on their own whether an undocumented passenger would qualify for an unforeseen emergency waiver. CBP Response CBP agrees that this rule will incentivize carriers to make a reasonable, good-faith effort to ensure that every alien has the proper documentation prior to arrival in the United States. Conclusion After review of the comments and further consideration, DHS adopts as final the proposed amendments published in the Federal Register (81 FR 12032) on March 8, 2016. [[Page 41869]] Regulatory Analyses A. Executive Order 13563 and Executive Order 12866 Executive Orders 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'') and 13563 (``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'') direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. Executive Order 13771 (``Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs'') directs agencies to reduce regulation and control regulatory costs and provides that ``for every one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process.'' The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this rule a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not reviewed it. As this rule is not a significant regulatory action, this rule is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771. See OMB's Memorandum titled ``Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the Executive Order of January 30, 2017 titled `Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs' '' (February 2, 2017). In 1996, the legacy INS published a final rule (61 FR 11717) amending 8 CFR 212.1(g) which allowed for the waiver of required passport and visa documents for a nonimmigrant in an unforeseen emergency while still retaining the ability to fine the carrier for transporting an alien to the United States without the required documents. In 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued an opinion in United Airlines, Inc. v. Brien, 588 F.3d 158 (2d Cir. 2009), which held that the regulation amending 8 CFR 212.1(g) was improperly promulgated because DOS and the legacy INS did not jointly promulgate the rule. In its ruling, the court upheld legacy INS's decision to parole aliens arriving in the United States without proper documents rather than granting them a waiver, thereby preserving INS's authority to fine the carrier under section 273 of the INA.\7\ See United Airlines, 588 F.3d at 174. This has led to a situation in which carriers are being penalized inconsistently when they transport aliens to the United States without proper documentation. If an alien qualifies for parole, the carrier nonetheless is subject to a fine. If an alien does not qualify for parole but receives a waiver, the carrier is not subject to a fine. Since the carriers' underlying conduct is the same in both cases, i.e., transporting an alien to the United States without proper documentation, CBP believes the penalties should be the same. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\ An alien applying for admission may be paroled into the United States for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit. Parole does not constitute an admission to the United States and is to be terminated when, inter alia, the purpose of parole is accomplished or neither humanitarian reasons nor public benefit warrants the continued presence of the alien in the United States. See INA sections 212(d)(5), 101(a)(13)(B) (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5), 1101(a)(13)(B)); see also 8 CFR 212.5(c)-(e); http://www.dhs.gov/definition-terms for information on various types of parole. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- As such, DHS and DOS are now jointly promulgating final rules to allow CBP to waive the requirement to present entry documents for nonimmigrants under an unforeseen emergency while still retaining the ability to fine the carrier for transporting an alien to the United States without proper entry documentation.\8\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ The maximum penalty amount under section 273 has increased from $4,300 to $5,432 as a result of multiple adjustments to account for inflation. See supra note 7. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- From FY 2010-2016,\9\ if this rule had been in effect, carriers would have been subject to penalties averaging $1.4 million per year for 786 violations of section 273. This $1.4 million represents a transfer from violative carriers to the United States government. To avoid the penalties imposed by this rule and existing penalties, carriers may adopt further oversight. In the NPRM, CBP requested comment on any additional oversight costs that could result from this rule but no such comments were received. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \9\ Note that in the NPRM we used data from FY 2010-2015. Now that FY 2016 data is available, we have included it in the analysis. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CBP currently assesses penalties under this provision against any carriers that transport aliens without proper documents who are inadmissible, including when these aliens qualify for parole. Therefore, CBP will not have to set up a new process to fine carriers as a result of this rule. A penalty under this provision takes CBP approximately 2.5 hours to process. Therefore, on average this rule would take approximately 1,965 hours (2.5 hours per violation * 786 violations per year) a year for CBP to administer. Currently, carriers are penalized for violations of section 273 inconsistently. When a carrier transports an alien without proper documentation, whether it is penalized depends not on the nature of the carrier's violation, but on whether the alien it transported qualifies for a waiver. CBP believes it is more equitable to penalize carriers who violate section 273 equally. Additionally, CBP believes that the language of 8 CFR 212.1(g), as amended in the final rule, which allows CBP to assess a section 273 penalty when a waiver is granted, provides an economic incentive for carriers to comply with the statutory requirements of section 273. Finally, we received three comments that were supportive of the rule on the basis that the rule would create an economic incentive for carriers to comply with section 273. For additional analysis on the impacts of this rule on small entities and a discussion of alternatives, see section B, Regulatory Flexibility Act. B. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement and Fairness Act of 1996, requires agencies to assess the impact of regulations on small entities. A small entity may be a small business (defined as any independently owned and operated business not dominant in its field that qualifies as a small business per the Small Business Act); a small not-for-profit organization; or a small governmental jurisdiction (locality with fewer than 50,000 people). As discussed above, DHS and DOS are finalizing parallel and simultaneous amendments to 8 CFR 212.1(g) and 22 CFR 41.2(i) respectively, that would allow CBP to waive the passport and/or visa requirements for nonimmigrants due to an unforeseen emergency while retaining the authority to impose a maximum penalty of $5,432 on a carrier for transporting an alien to the United States without proper documentation. The Regulatory Flexibility Act does not specify thresholds for economic significance but instead gives agencies flexibility to determine the appropriate threshold for a particular rule. CBP believes that a maximum penalty of $5,432 may be considered a significant economic impact given the wide range of companies subject to the requirements of this rule and that it is possible that a specific small entity may receive more than one penalty in a year. Therefore, CBP is preparing this Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis under [[Page 41870]] section 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. It is unlawful under section 273 of the INA for any person or company to transport an alien to the United States (other than from a foreign contiguous territory) who does not have a valid passport and an unexpired visa (if a visa is required). 8 U.S.C. 1323. As such, it is possible that any person or company engaged in the transportation of aliens may be affected by this rule. Below, Table 1 presents data on the industries CBP has identified that could be affected by this rule. While CBP finds that only 19 small entities have violated section 273 from FY 2011 to FY 2016, CBP is unable to certify that a substantial number of small entities will not be affected by the final rule in the future.\10\ Accordingly, CBP has conducted the following Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \10\ Since November 20, 2009, CBP has been unable to impose a penalty when a section 212(d)(4)(A) waiver has been granted to an alien without proper documentation. Nevertheless, the small entities listed in Table 1 transported aliens who received such waivers. The small entities responsible for transporting the aliens were not assessed a penalty. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. A statement of the need for, and objectives of, the rule. In 1996, the legacy INS published a final rule (61 FR 11717) amending 8 CFR 212.1(g). The amended regulation allowed for the waiver of required passport and visa documents for a nonimmigrant in an unforeseen emergency while still retaining the authority to fine the carrier for transporting an alien to the United States without the required documents. In 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued an opinion in United Airlines, Inc. v. Brien, 588 F.3d 158 (2d Cir. 2009), holding that the regulation amending 8 CFR 212.1(g) was improperly promulgated because DOS and the legacy INS did not jointly promulgate the rule. As such, DHS and DOS are now jointly promulgating rules to allow CBP to waive the requirement to present entry documents for nonimmigrants under an unforeseen emergency while still retaining the ability to fine the carrier for transporting an alien to the United States without proper entry documentation. CBP has concluded that the language of 8 CFR 212.1(g), as amended in the final rule, which allows CBP to assess a section 273 penalty when a waiver is granted, provides the necessary economic incentive for carriers to comply with the statutory requirements of section 273. The objective of this regulation is to allow CBP to retain its ability to fine a carrier for transporting an alien to the United States without proper entry documentation in the event it grants the alien a waiver for an unforeseen emergency. In general, nonimmigrant aliens must present an unexpired passport and, if required, a valid unexpired visa in order to be admitted to the United States. See section 212(a)(7)(B)(i) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(7)(B)(i)). The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of State, acting jointly, in specified situations may waive either or both of these requirements. See sections 212(a)(7)(B)(ii) and 212(d)(4) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(7)(B)(ii), 1182(d)(4)). One of these situations is when the nonimmigrant is unable to present the required documents due to an unforeseen emergency. 2. A statement of the significant issues raised by the public comments in response to the initial regulatory flexibility analysis, a statement of the assessment of the agency of such issues, and a statement of any changes made in the proposed rule as a result of such comments. CBP received three comments on the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, published with the NPRM. Two of the commenters were supportive of both the rule and the analysis and one commenter was not. The two commenters that were supportive of the rule and the analysis agreed with CBP that this rule would encourage and incentivize carriers to confirm that every alien has the proper documentation prior to arrival in the United States. The one comment we received that was not supportive of the analysis was in favor of alternative 3, which was for CBP to take no regulatory action. We disagree with this comment because this alternative would continue the current inconsistency regarding the assessment of fines when a carrier violates section 273 for transporting an alien without proper documents based on whether the alien qualifies for parole. Under the commenter's proposed alternative, carriers who transport an alien without proper documents would be subject to a fine if the alien qualifies for parole, but would not be subject to a fine if the alien does not qualify for parole. Since CBP wants to eliminate this inconsistency, we did not make any changes to the rule as a result of the comments. 3. The response of the agency to any comments filed by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration in response to the proposed rule, and a detailed statement of any change made to the proposed rule in the final rule as a result of the comments. CBP did not receive any comments from the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. 4. A description of and an estimate of the number of small entities to which the rule will apply or an explanation of why no such estimate is available. It is unlawful under section 273 for any person or company to transport an alien to the United States (other than from a foreign contiguous territory) who does not have a valid passport and an unexpired visa (if a visa is required). As such, it is possible that any person or company engaged in the transportation of aliens may be affected by this rule. Below, Table 1 presents data on the industries that CBP estimates could be affected by this rule. The data include the NAICS codes of an industry, a description of the industry, and the Small Business Administration's (SBA) guidance on what qualifies an entity to be considered small in the respective industry.\11\ Additionally, Table 1 includes the number small entities in the respective industry that have violated section 273 from FY 2011 through FY 2016.\12\ Of the industries that could be affected, only six industries have had small entities that have violated section 273 from FY 2011 through FY 2016.\13\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \11\ SBA Table of Small Business Size Standards Matched to small business North American Industry Classification System Codes, effective February 26, 2016, can be found here: https://www.sba.gov/contracting/getting-started-contractor/make-sure-you-meet-sba-size-standards. \12\ Since November 20, 2009, CBP has been unable to impose a penalty when a 212.1(g) waiver has been granted to an alien without proper documentation. Nevertheless, the small entities listed in Table 1 transported aliens who received 212.1(g) waivers. The small entities responsible for transporting the aliens were not assessed a penalty. \13\ We received data on which companies between FY 2011 and FY 2016 violated section 273 from CBP's Office of Field Operations, which assesses the penalties. We then looked up each of the violating companies on Hoovers to determine how many were small and in what industry each violating company belonged. Hoovers is a business research company that provides information on companies and industries on its Web site, www.hoovers.com. [[Page 41871]] Table 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Small entities that have NAICS Industry description SBA size standard violated Sec. 273 of the INA ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 481111................................ Scheduled Passenger Air <1,500 employees........ 12 Transportation. 481112................................ Scheduled Freight Air <1,500 employees........ 0 Transportation. 481211................................ Nonscheduled Chartered <1,500 employees........ 2 Passenger Air Transportation. 481212................................ Nonscheduled Chartered Freight <1,500 employees........ 0 Air Transportation. 481219................................ Other Nonscheduled Air <$15 million in revenue. 0 Transportation. 488119................................ Other Airport Operations...... <$32.5 million in 2 revenue. 482111................................ Line-Haul Railroads........... <1,500 employees........ 0 482112................................ Short Line Railroads.......... <1,500 employees........ 0 483111................................ Deep Sea Freight <500 employees.......... 0 Transportation. 483112................................ Deep Sea Passenger <1,500 employees........ 0 Transportation. 483113................................ Coastal and Great Lakes <500 employees.......... 0 Freight Transportation. 483114................................ Coastal and Great Lakes <500 employees.......... 0 Passenger Transportation. 483211................................ Inland Water Freight <750 employees.......... 0 Transportation. 483212................................ Inland Water Passenger <500 employees.......... 0 Transportation. 484230................................ Specialized Freight (except, <$27.5 million in 0 Used Goods) Trucking, Long- revenue. Distance. 485991................................ Special Needs Transportation.. <$15 million in revenue. 0 487110................................ Scenic and Sightseeing <$7.5 million in revenue 0 Transportation, Land. 423860................................ Scenic and Sightseeing <500 employees.......... 1 Transportation, Land Transportation Equipment and Supplies (except Motor Vehicle) Merchant Wholesalers. 488330................................ Navigational Services to <$38.5 million in 0 Shipping. revenue. 441228................................ Motorcycle, ATV, and All Other <500 employees.......... 1 Motor Vehicle Dealers. 541614................................ Process, Physical Distribution <$15 million in revenue. 0 and Logistics Consulting Services. 561520................................ Tour Operators................ <$20.5 million in 1 revenue. 621910................................ Ambulance Services............ <$15 million in revenue. 0 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Small Business Administration, CBP, and Hoovers Inc. To estimate the number of small entities to which the final rule will apply, CBP needs an estimate of the total number of small entities within an industry and the number of these small entities that are, or will be, engaged in the transportation of aliens. The U.S. Census Bureau (Census) provides estimates of the number of entities within an industry. The Census organizes an industry by various intervals of annual revenue and number of employees.\14\ Using these intervals and the SBA's small entity standards, CBP can estimate the number of small entities within an industry. However, the Census intervals do not necessarily correspond exactly with the SBA's small entity size standards. As an example, as shown in Table 2 below, the SBA's small entity size standards state that an entity classified under NAICS code 481211 is small if it has fewer than 1,500 employees. The Census, however, only has the following intervals of employees: 0-4 employees, 5-9 employees, 10-19 employees, 20-99 employees, 100-499 employees, and 500+ employees. It is not possible to differentiate between the entities in the 500+ employee interval that would be considered small under SBA's small entity size standards (entities with fewer than 1,500 employees) and those entities the SBA does not consider small (entities with more than 1,500 employees). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \14\ http://www.census.gov/econ/susb/. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- We therefore, sought an alternative data source to supplement the Census data. Any scheduled airline with a capacity of carrying over 18,000 pounds is required to report employee information to the Department of Transportation.\15\ Using this data, we were able to identify carriers with over 1,500 employees, who are not considered small entities under the SBA size standards. We subtracted these airlines from the total small entities in each NAICS code to estimate the total small entities that could be affected by this rule. We note that these estimates could include businesses with over 1,500 employees that have a payload of less than 18,000 pounds or that do not offer scheduled flights. As there are a large number of small businesses with over 18,000 pounds of capacity, as shown in DOT's data, we do not believe there are many, if any, large carriers that are not included in DOT's data. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \15\ http://transtats.bts.gov/Employment/. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Although CBP can use the Census and DOT data to provide an estimate of the number of small entities that have the potential to be affected by this rule, CBP cannot use the Census data to determine the number of small entities that are, or will be, engaged in the transportation of aliens within a reasonable degree of accuracy.\16\ As shown in both Tables 1 and 2, however, CBP's internal records show that only 19 small entities from FY 2011 to FY 2016 violated section 273 and thus would have been subject to a penalty if this rule were in effect.\17\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \16\ For instance, CBP cannot tell which scheduled passenger air transportation entities do, or will, transport aliens and which do, or will, not transport aliens. \17\ Note that in the IRFA we used data from FY 2008-2012. We have updated the analysis to use more recent data. Table 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Small entities SBA size Total number of Total number of that have NAICS Industry description standard entities small entities violated Sec. 273 of the INA ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 481111........ Scheduled Passenger <1,500 employees 264................ 239............... 12 Air Transportation. [[Page 41872]] 481112........ Scheduled Freight Air <1,500 employees 212................ 20,7227........... 0 Transportation. 481211........ Nonscheduled <1,500 employees 1,479.............. 1,396............. 2 Chartered Passenger Air Transportation. 481212........ Nonscheduled <1,500 employees 177................ 171............... 0 Chartered Freight Air Transportation. 481219........ Other Nonscheduled <$15 million in 516................ 504............... 0 Air Transportation. revenue. 488119........ Other Airport <$32.5 million 1,149.............. 1,085............. 2 Operations. in revenue. 482111........ Line-Haul Railroads.. <1,500 employees not available...... not available..... 0 482112........ Short Line railroads. <1,500 employees not available...... not available..... 0 483111........ Deep Sea Freight <500 employees.. 191................ 177............... 0 Transportation. 483112........ Deep Sea Passenger <1,500 employees 54................. 47................ 0 Transportation. 483113........ Coastal and Great <500 employees.. 337................ 307............... 0 Lakes Freight Transportation. 483114........ Coastal and Great <500 employees.. 110................ 108............... 0 Lakes Passenger Transportation. 483211........ Inland Water Freight <750 employees.. 318................ 294............... 0 Transportation. 483212........ Inland Water <500 employees.. 193................ 191............... 0 Passenger Transportation. 484230........ Specialized Freight <$27.5 million 8,100.............. 7,927............. 0 (except, Used Goods) in revenue. Trucking, Long- Distance. 485991........ Special Needs <$15 million in 2,627.............. 2,567............. 0 Transportation. revenue. 487110........ Scenic and <$7.5 million in 564................ 553............... 0 Sightseeing revenue. Transportation, Land. 423860........ Scenic and <500 employees.. 2,149.............. 2,082............. 1 Sightseeing Transportation, Land Transportation Equipment and Supplies (except Motor Vehicle) Merchant Wholesalers. 488330........ Navigational Services <$38.5 million 718................ 694............... 0 to Shipping. in revenue. 441228........ Motorcycle, ATV, and <500 employees.. 6,329.............. 6,312............. 1 All Other Motor Vehicle Dealers. 541614........ Process, Physical <$15 million in 6,667.............. 6,556............. 0 Distribution and revenue. Logistics Consulting Services. 561520........ Tour Operators....... <$20.5 million 2,609.............. 2,586............. 1 in revenue. 621910........ Ambulance Services... <$15 million in 3,314.............. 3,217............. 0 revenue. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Small Business Administration, CBP, and Hoovers Inc. 5. A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping and other compliance requirements of the rule, including an estimate of the classes of small entities which will be subject to the requirement and the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report or record. The regulation does not include changes to any required reporting, recordkeeping, or compliance requirements. The objective of the rule is to allow CBP in an unforeseen emergency to waive the requirement that a nonimmigrant present proper entry documents in order to be admitted into the United States while retaining the ability to fine the carrier that did not comply with the requirements pertaining to the proper transportation of an alien to the United States. When the nonimmigrant without proper documentation is not admitted, including when he or she is granted parole, CBP already has the authority to fine the carrier that did not comply with the requirements. This rule only affects the carriers transporting aliens for whom CBP waives the document requirement due to an unforeseen emergency. As discussed above, the rule could affect any small entity that transports an alien without proper entry documentation. 6. A description of the steps the agency has taken to minimize the significant economic impact on small entities consistent with the stated objectives of applicable statutes, including a statement of the factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting the alternative adopted in the final rule and why each one of the other significant alternatives to the rule considered by the agency which affect the impact on small entities was rejected. Alternative 1 (chosen alternative): Allows CBP to waive the requirement for nonimmigrants to present valid documentation for entry into the United States in an unforeseen emergency while retaining the ability to enforce the statutory requirement imposing a maximum penalty of $5,432 on a carrier, regardless of size, for transporting an alien to the United States without proper documentation. When the nonimmigrant without proper documentation is not admitted, including when he or she is granted parole, CBP already has the authority to fine the carrier that did not comply with the requirements. Alternative 2: Same as Alternative 1, but waive the penalty in Alternative 1 for small entities. Alternative 3: No regulatory action (i.e. the situation as it is now). CBP has chosen to implement Alternative 1. CBP believes that a penalty mechanism is necessary in order to enforce the statutory prohibition on transporting aliens into the United States without proper documentation. In addition, this rule would end the current inconsistency in the issuance of fines for violations of section 273. CBP believes that the language of 8 CFR 212.1(g), as amended in the final rule, which allows CBP to assess a section 273 penalty when a waiver is granted, provides an economic incentive for carriers to comply with the requirements of section 273. Finally, those who commented on the proposed rule were supportive of the chosen alternative. Alternative 2 would eliminate the economic impact of the proposed rule on noncompliant small entities. CBP believes that it would also eliminate the economic incentive for carriers to comply with the statutory requirements of section 273 for small entities. Furthermore, 8 CFR 273.5 sets forth the [[Page 41873]] mitigation criteria for the mitigation of fines under section 273(e) and incorporates the administrative procedures provided for in 8 CFR 280.12 and 280.51. In determining the amount of the mitigation, CBP may take into account the effectiveness of the carrier's screening procedures, the carrier's history of fines, and the existence of extenuating circumstances. This mitigation is available to any carrier, including small entities. Alternative 3 would eliminate the economic impact of the proposed rule for all noncompliant carriers, regardless of size. In addition, the current inconsistency in fines for violations of section 273 would continue. Carriers who transport aliens who qualify for parole would be subject to a fine if they do not adhere to the requirements of section 273, but those who transport aliens who qualify for unforeseen emergency waivers would not be subject to a fine. C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq., requires agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. This rule will not result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year (adjusted for inflation), and it will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions are necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. D. Executive Order 13132 This rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with section 6 of Executive Order 13132, this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. E. Paperwork Reduction Act In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. 3507) an agency may not conduct, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid control number assigned by OMB. The collections of information for this final rule are included in an existing collection for DHS Form I-193 (OMB control number 1651- 0107). List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 212 Administrative practice and procedure, Aliens, Immigration, Passports and visas, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Amendments to the Regulations For the reasons stated in the preamble, DHS amends part 212 of title 8 of the Code of Federal Regulations (8 CFR part 212), as set forth below. PART 212--DOCUMENTARY REQUIREMENTS: NONIMMIGRANTS; WAIVERS; ADMISSION OF CERTAIN INADMISSIBLE ALIENS; PAROLE 0 1. The general authority citation for part 212 is revised to read as follows: Authority: 6 U.S.C. 111, 202, 236 and 271; 8 U.S.C. 1101 and note, 1102, 1103, 1182 and note, 1184, 1185, 1187, 1223, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1255, 1359; 8 U.S.C. 1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108- 458); 8 CFR part 2. * * * * * 0 2. Amend Sec. 212.1 by revising paragraph (g) to read as follows: Sec. 212.1 Documentary requirements for nonimmigrants. * * * * * (g) Unforeseen emergency. A nonimmigrant seeking admission to the United States must present an unexpired visa and passport valid for the amount of time set forth in section 212(a)(7)(B)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(7)(B)(i), or a valid biometric border crossing card issued by the DOS on Form DSP-150, at the time of application for admission, unless the nonimmigrant satisfies the requirements described in one or more of paragraphs (a) through (f) or (i), (o), or (p) of this section. Upon a nonimmigrant's application on Form I-193, or successor form, ``Application for Waiver of Passport and/or Visa,'' a district director may, in the exercise of its discretion, on a case-by- case basis, waive either or both of the documentary requirements of section 212(a)(7)(B)(i) if satisfied that the nonimmigrant cannot present the required documents because of an unforeseen emergency. The district director may at any time revoke a waiver previously authorized pursuant to this paragraph and notify the nonimmigrant in writing to that effect. * * * * * Elaine C. Duke, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. 2017-18749 Filed 9-1-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 5, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 41867
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND of the Immigration and Nationality Act this provision. The 1996 amendment of
SECURITY (INA), as amended (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)); 8 CFR 212.1(g) would have removed the
see also section 212(a)(7)(B)(i) of the phrase that a visa and passport ‘‘are not
8 CFR Part 212 INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(7)(B)(i)) required’’ if legacy INS (now CBP)
RIN 1651–AA97 (describing documentary requirements concluded that the nonimmigrant was
for nonimmigrants). One of these unable to present the required
[USCBP–2016–0006; CBP Decision No. 17– situations is where the agencies documents because of an unforeseen
10] determine in individual cases that the emergency.
nonimmigrant is unable to present the The NPRM proposed to reinstate the
Waiver of Passport and Visa
required documents due to an 1996 amendment by removing the
Requirements Due to an Unforeseen
unforeseen emergency. See section phrase ‘‘are not required’’ so that CBP
Emergency
212(d)(4)(A) of the INA (8 U.S.C. could assess carrier fines under section
AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border 1182(d)(4)(A)). Regulations governing 273 of the INA in appropriate cases
Protection, DHS. issuance of unforeseen emergency notwithstanding that an ‘‘unforeseen
ACTION: Final rule. waivers are set forth at 8 CFR 212.1(g). emergency’’ waiver has been granted
DOS has similar implementing under section 212(d)(4)(A) of the Act
SUMMARY: This rule adopts as final regulations. See 22 CFR 41.2(i). and 8 CFR 212.1(g).2 The NPRM also
proposed amendments to the On March 8, 2016, U.S. Customs and proposed to amend 8 CFR 212.1(g) by
Department of Homeland Security’s Border Protection (CBP) published a reinstating 2002 and 2007 amendments
(DHS) regulations describing the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to 8 CFR 212.1(g) that were also
procedures for issuance of a in the Federal Register (81 FR 12032) invalidated as a result of the court order
discretionary waiver, on the basis of proposing to amend 8 CFR 212.1(g). The in United Airlines.3
unforeseen emergency in individual NPRM provided a 60-day public Further background information is
cases, of certain documentary comment period. In the NPRM, CBP provided in the NPRM. On March 8,
requirements for individuals seeking proposed to reinstate a 1996 amendment 2016, DOS published a parallel NPRM
admission to the United States as a to 8 CFR 212.1(g) that was invalidated proposing amendment of 22 CFR 41.2(i).
nonimmigrant. The Department of State by court order in United Airlines, Inc. v. See 81 FR 12050.
(DOS) is issuing a parallel final rule Brien, 588 F.3d 158 (2d Cir. 2009). The
amending a similar DOS regulation court invalidated the 1996 amendment Discussion of Comments
published in today’s edition of the on procedural grounds because the DHS received eleven comments on
Federal Register. DHS and DOS have legacy Immigration and Naturalization this rule. Two comments favored the
acted jointly in this matter. Service (INS) did not coordinate with proposed amendments, and two did not.
DATES: This rule is effective October 5, DOS in amending the regulation in The remaining comments criticized U.S.
2017. violation of the joint action requirement immigration policy or aspects of the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: under section 212(d)(4)(A) of the INA (8 regulation that were unchanged and are
Joseph O’Donnell, Fines, Penalties and U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(A)). United Airlines, outside the scope of this rulemaking. A
Forfeitures, Office of Field Operations, 588 F.3d at 179. summary of the relevant issues raised in
U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Among other things, the 1996 the comments and CBP’s responses are
telephone number (202) 344–1691, or by amendment would have removed set forth below.
email at joseph.r.odonnell@cbp.dhs.gov. certain language from 8 CFR 212.1(g) Comment
that precluded DHS from assessing
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
carrier fines under section 273 of the Two commenters said that the
Background INA (8 U.S.C. 1323) when an proposed regulation did not clearly
‘‘unforeseen emergency’’ waiver had specify what constitutes an ‘‘unforeseen
The Secretary of Homeland Security
been granted under section 212(d)(4)(A) emergency’’ under 8 CFR 212.1(g). One
and the Secretary of State, acting jointly,
of the INA and 8 CFR 212.1(g). Section of these commenters recommended the
in specified situations, may waive
273 of the INA makes it unlawful for a addition of more details about the
certain documentary requirements (i.e.,
carrier to bring to the United States any criteria for qualifying for the unforeseen
an unexpired passport and, if required,
alien who does not have a valid emergency waiver. The other
a valid unexpired visa) for individuals
passport and an unexpired visa, if a visa commenter requested an explanation of
seeking admission to the United States
was required under the INA or the the phrase ‘‘unforeseen emergency’’ and
as nonimmigrants.1 See section 212(d)(4)
regulations issued thereunder, and was concerned about the ‘‘lack of
1 Previously, the Attorney General acting jointly subjects the carrier to a fine for violating substantial definitions on key terms.’’
with the Secretary of State was authorized to waive
2 CBP would not apply a fine if CBP granted the
the documentary requirements due to an unforeseen of the HSA and 8 CFR 2.1, the authorities of the
emergency. However, pursuant to the Homeland Attorney General, as described in section 212 of the waiver and did not revoke it prior to the
Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107–296, 116 Stat. INA (8 U.S.C. 1182), were transferred to the nonimmigrant alien’s boarding.
2135 (HSA), as of March 1, 2003, functions of the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the reference 3 The INS amended the regulation in 2002 to
legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service to the Attorney General in the statute is deemed to update documentary requirements, and DHS
(INS) of the Department of Justice and the legacy refer to the Secretary. Thus, the waiver authority in
amended the regulation in 2007 to include U
U.S. Customs Service of the Department of the section 212(d)(4) of the INA now resides with the
Treasury were transferred to DHS. Specifically, Secretary of Homeland Security acting jointly with nonimmigrants among those who could seek a
pursuant to sections 102(a), 441, 1512(d) and 1517 the Secretary of State. waiver. See 67 FR 71443 (Dec. 2, 2002) and 72 FR
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
53014 (Sept. 17, 2007).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:52 Sep 01, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\05SER1.SGM 05SER1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_42037/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 5, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 41873
mitigation criteria for the mitigation of DHS Form I–193 (OMB control number NUCLEAR REGULATORY
fines under section 273(e) and 1651–0107). COMMISSION
incorporates the administrative
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 212 10 CFR Part 72
procedures provided for in 8 CFR
280.12 and 280.51. In determining the Administrative practice and [NRC–2017–0089]
amount of the mitigation, CBP may take procedure, Aliens, Immigration,
into account the effectiveness of the Passports and visas, Reporting and RIN 3150–AK03
carrier’s screening procedures, the recordkeeping requirements.
carrier’s history of fines, and the List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage
existence of extenuating circumstances. Amendments to the Regulations Casks: Holtec International HI–STORM
This mitigation is available to any Flood/Wind Multipurpose Canister
For the reasons stated in the
carrier, including small entities. Storage System, Certificate of
preamble, DHS amends part 212 of title
Alternative 3 would eliminate the Compliance No. 1032, Amendment No.
8 of the Code of Federal Regulations (8
economic impact of the proposed rule 3
CFR part 212), as set forth below.
for all noncompliant carriers, regardless AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory
of size. In addition, the current PART 212—DOCUMENTARY Commission.
inconsistency in fines for violations of REQUIREMENTS: NONIMMIGRANTS; ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of
section 273 would continue. Carriers WAIVERS; ADMISSION OF CERTAIN effective date.
who transport aliens who qualify for INADMISSIBLE ALIENS; PAROLE
parole would be subject to a fine if they SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
do not adhere to the requirements of ■ 1. The general authority citation for Commission (NRC) is confirming the
section 273, but those who transport part 212 is revised to read as follows: effective date of September 11, 2017, for
aliens who qualify for unforeseen Authority: 6 U.S.C. 111, 202, 236 and 271; the direct final rule that was published
emergency waivers would not be subject 8 U.S.C. 1101 and note, 1102, 1103, 1182 and in the Federal Register on June 28,
to a fine. note, 1184, 1185, 1187, 1223, 1225, 1226, 2017. This direct final rule amended
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1227, 1255, 1359; 8 U.S.C. 1185 note (section NRC’s spent fuel storage regulations by
7209 of Pub. L. 108–458); 8 CFR part 2. revising the ‘‘List of Approved Spent
1995
* * * * * Fuel Storage Casks’’ to include
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Amendment No. 3 to Certificate of
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. ■ 2. Amend § 212.1 by revising
paragraph (g) to read as follows: Compliance (CoC) No. 1032 for the
1501 et seq., requires agencies to assess Holtec International (Holtec) HI–
the effects of their regulatory actions on § 212.1 Documentary requirements for STORM Flood/Wind (FW) Multipurpose
State, local, and tribal governments and nonimmigrants. Canister (MPC) Storage System.
the private sector. This rule will not * * * * * DATES: Effective Date: The effective date
result in the expenditure by State, local,
(g) Unforeseen emergency. A of September 11, 2017, for the direct
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
nonimmigrant seeking admission to the final rule published June 28, 2017 (82
or by the private sector, of $100 million
United States must present an FR 29225), is confirmed.
or more in any one year (adjusted for
inflation), and it will not significantly or unexpired visa and passport valid for ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID
uniquely affect small governments. the amount of time set forth in section NRC–2017–0089 when contacting the
Therefore, no actions are necessary 212(a)(7)(B)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. NRC about the availability of
under the provisions of the Unfunded 1182(a)(7)(B)(i), or a valid biometric information for this action. You may
Mandates Reform Act of 1995. border crossing card issued by the DOS obtain publicly-available information
on Form DSP–150, at the time of related to this action by any of the
D. Executive Order 13132 application for admission, unless the following methods:
This rule will not have substantial nonimmigrant satisfies the requirements • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
direct effects on the States, on the described in one or more of paragraphs http://www.regulations.gov and search
relationship between the National (a) through (f) or (i), (o), or (p) of this for Docket ID NRC–2017–0089. Address
Government and the States, or on the section. Upon a nonimmigrant’s questions about NRC dockets to Carol
distribution of power and application on Form I–193, or successor Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463;
responsibilities among the various form, ‘‘Application for Waiver of email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For
levels of government. Therefore, in Passport and/or Visa,’’ a district director technical questions, contact the
accordance with section 6 of Executive may, in the exercise of its discretion, on individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
Order 13132, this rule does not have a case-by-case basis, waive either or INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
sufficient federalism implications to both of the documentary requirements document.
warrant the preparation of a federalism of section 212(a)(7)(B)(i) if satisfied that • NRC’s Agencywide Documents
summary impact statement. the nonimmigrant cannot present the Access and Management System
required documents because of an (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-
E. Paperwork Reduction Act unforeseen emergency. The district available documents online in the
In accordance with the Paperwork director may at any time revoke a ADAMS Public Documents collection at
Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13, waiver previously authorized pursuant http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
44 U.S.C. 3507) an agency may not to this paragraph and notify the adams.html. To begin the search, select
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
conduct, and a person is not required to nonimmigrant in writing to that effect. ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then
respond to, a collection of information * * * * * select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS
unless the collection of information Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS,
displays a valid control number Elaine C. Duke, please contact the NRC’s Public
assigned by OMB. The collections of Acting Secretary. Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
information for this final rule are [FR Doc. 2017–18749 Filed 9–1–17; 8:45 am] 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by
included in an existing collection for BILLING CODE 9111–14–P email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:52 Sep 01, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\05SER1.SGM 05SER1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_42037/page/7.svg)
Document Created: 2017-09-02 03:25:00
Document Modified: 2017-09-02 03:25:00
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Final rule. | |
| Dates | This rule is effective October 5, 2017. | |
| Contact | Joseph O'Donnell, Fines, Penalties and Forfeitures, Office of Field Operations, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, telephone number (202) 344-1691, or by email at [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 82 FR 41867 | |
| RIN Number | 1651-AA97 | |
| CFR Associated | Administrative Practice and Procedure; Aliens; Immigration; Passports and Visas and Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR