Petitions for Aliens To Perform Nonagricultural Temporary Services or Labor (H-2B): Withdrawal of Proposed Rule, 49122-49123 [E8-19322]
Download as PDF
dwashington3 on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
49122
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 20, 2008 / Proposed Rules
(11) * * *
(iii) * * *
(A) * * *
(2) The statement of facts contained in
the petition or on the application for a
labor certification was not true and
correct, inaccurate, fraudulent, or
misrepresented a material fact; or
*
*
*
*
*
(13) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) When an alien in an H
classification has spent the maximum
allowable period of stay in the United
States, a new petition under sections
101(a)(15)(H) or (L) of the Act may not
be approved unless that alien has
resided and been physically present
outside the United States, except for
brief trips for business or pleasure, for
the time limit imposed on the particular
H classification. Brief trips to the United
States for business or pleasure during
the required time abroad are not
interruptive, but do not count towards
fulfillment of the required time abroad.
A certain period of absence from the
United States of H–2A and H–2B aliens
can interrupt the accrual of time spent
in such status against the three-year
limit. The petitioner shall provide
information about the alien’s
employment, place of residence, and the
dates and purposes of any trips to the
United States during the period that the
alien was required to spend time
abroad.
*
*
*
*
*
(iv) H–2B and H–3 limitation on
admission. An H–2B alien who has
spent 3 years in the United States under
section 101(a)(15)(H) and/or (L) of the
Act may not seek extension, change
status, or be readmitted to the United
States under section 101(a)(15)(H) and/
or (L) of the Act unless the alien has
resided and been physically present
outside the United States for the
immediate prior 3 months. An H–3 alien
participant in a special education
program who has spent 18 months in
the United States under section
101(a)(15)(H) and/or (L) of the Act; and
an H–3 alien trainee who has spent 24
months in the United States under
section 101(a)(15)(H) and/or (L) of the
Act may not seek extension, change
status, or be readmitted to the United
States under section 101(a)(15)(H) and/
or (L) of the Act unless the alien has
resided and been physically present
outside the United States for the
immediate prior 6 months.
(v) Exceptions. The limitations in
paragraph (h)(13)(iii) through (h)(13)(iv)
of this section shall not apply to H–1B,
H–2B, and H–3 aliens who did not
reside continually in the United States
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:35 Aug 19, 2008
Jkt 214001
and whose employment in the United
States was seasonal or intermittent or
was for an aggregate of six months or
less per year. In addition, the limitations
shall not apply to aliens who reside
abroad and regularly commute to the
United States to engage in part-time
employment. An absence from the
United States can interrupt the accrual
of time spent as an H–2B nonimmigrant
against the three-year limit. If the
accumulated stay is 18 months or less,
an absence is interruptive if it lasts for
at least 45 days. If the accumulated stay
is greater than 18 months, an absence is
interruptive if it last for at least two
months. To qualify for this exception,
the petitioner and the alien must
provide clear and convincing proof that
the alien qualifies for such an exception.
Such proof shall consist of evidence
such as arrival and departure records,
copies of tax returns, and records of
employment abroad.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 215—CONTROLS OF ALIENS
DEPARTING FROM THE UNITED
STATES
6. The authority citation for part 215
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; 1184; 1185
(pursuant to Executive Order 13323,
published January 2, 2004), 1365a note, 1379,
1731–32.
7. Section 215.9 is added to read as
follows:
§ 215.9 Temporary Worker Visa Exit
Program.
An alien admitted on certain
temporary worker visas at a port of entry
participating in the Temporary Worker
Visa Exit Program must also depart at
the end of their authorized period of
stay through a port of entry participating
in the program and present designated
biographic and/or biometric information
upon departure. U.S. Customs and
Border Protection will publish a Notice
in the Federal Register designating
which temporary workers must
participate in the Temporary Worker
Visa Exit Program, which ports of entry
are participating in the program, which
biographical and/or biometric
information would be required, and the
format for submission of that
information by the departing designated
temporary workers.
Dated: August 11, 2008.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–19306 Filed 8–19–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–97–P
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
8 CFR Part 214
[CIS No. 2448–08; DHS Docket No. USCIS–
2008–0024]
RIN 1615–AA82
Petitions for Aliens To Perform
Nonagricultural Temporary Services or
Labor (H–2B): Withdrawal of Proposed
Rule
U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Withdrawal of proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) is
withdrawing the proposed rule,
Petitions for Aliens to Perform
Nonagricultural Temporary Services or
Labor (H–2B), published on January 27,
2005, in the Federal Register at 70 FR
3984. The rule proposed significant
changes to USCIS’ regulations that were
designed to increase the effectiveness of
the H–2B nonimmigrant visa
classification while providing
protections for U.S. workers. The H–2B
nonimmigrant visa classification applies
to foreign workers to perform
nonagricultural temporary labor or
services. The proposed rule would have
established a one-step petition process
for U.S. employers seeking H–2B
temporary workers eliminating the need
for U.S. employers to apply for a labor
certification from the Department of
Labor (DOL); required electronic filing
of the Petition for a Nonimmigrant
Worker, Form I–129, within 60 days in
advance of the requested employment
start date; eliminated the use of agents
as H–2B petitioners; and, established
new management mechanisms allowing
USCIS to maintain the integrity of the
program. In light of the public’s
comments, USCIS is no longer moving
forward with the proposed rule as
designed and will publish a new
proposed rule for public comments.
DATES: The proposed rule, published on
January 27, 2005 (70 FR 3984), is
withdrawn as of August 20, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Hiroko Witherow, Service Center
Operations, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of
Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20529,
telephone (202) 272–8410.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Purpose of the Proposed Rule
The H–2 temporary worker program
has existed without substantial
modification since 1952. The
E:\FR\FM\20AUP1.SGM
20AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 20, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Immigration Reform and Control Act of
1986 divided H–2 workers into two
categories: Temporary workers to
perform agricultural labor or services
(H–2A), and all other temporary workers
(H–2B). In 1990, Congress attached a
limitation on the number of H–2B
workers, but otherwise the program has
not significantly changed to
accommodate employers’ needs or to
offer worker protections. After
consulting with DOL and the
Department of State, and reviewing the
definitions and procedures used to
regulate the H–2B nonagricultural
temporary worker program, USCIS
determined that the H–2B process
should be modified to reduce
unnecessary burdens that hinder
petitioning employers’ ability to
effectively use this visa category. The
proposed rule was published on January
27, 2005, with its intent being to
increase efficiency in the program by
removing existing regulatory barriers. 70
FR 3984.
dwashington3 on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
II. Changes Contained in the Proposed
Rule
The most significant proposed change
was a migration to a one-stop
attestation-based process whereby most
U.S. employers seeking H–2B temporary
workers would only be required to file
one application, the Form I–129,
Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker,
with USCIS. The proposal would have
reduced the paper-based application
process by requiring that most Form I–
129 petitions be submitted to USCIS
electronically through e-filing. The
proposal would also have required efiled petitions to be filed not more than
60 days in advance of the employment
need. The proposed rule also would
have precluded agents from filing H–2B
petitions on behalf of the actual H–2B
employer. Finally, the proposed rule
included additional changes to ensure
the integrity of the program through
enforcement mechanisms.
III. Comments Received on the
Proposed Rule
USCIS received 125 comments on the
proposed rule during the 60-day
comment period. The majority of the
commenters were opposed to many
changes proposed in the rule. The
comments are summarized as follows:
• There were a significant number of
negative comments regarding the
proposal to create a one-stop attestationbased process. Some commenters stated
that the existing labor certification
process should remain with DOL
because DOL, not USCIS, is directly
charged with the protection of U.S.
workers. Some also expressed concern
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:35 Aug 19, 2008
Jkt 214001
that this change would lead to
widespread fraud and
misrepresentation.
A considerable number of
commenters were in opposition to the
proposed change requiring that
petitioners e-file a petition within 60
days in advance of the employment
need. Some raised concern that many
employers are not necessarily wellversed in the access and use of the
Internet.
• A significant number of comments
were opposed to the proposal to
eliminate agents. Many commenters
stressed that agents perform a vital
function in the H–2B filing process on
behalf of the employers who are not
conversant with the applicable laws and
regulations related to the H–2B program.
• The majority of the comments
stressed that the proposed changes
would result in decreased protections
for U.S. workers and the likely
proliferation of fraud within the
program.
Based upon a review of the
rulemaking record as a whole, DHS has
decided to withdraw the January 27,
2005, proposed rule and terminate the
associated proposed rulemaking action.
DHS, therefore, will not publish specific
responses to each comment.
IV. Withdrawal of the Proposed Rule
For the reasons described in this
document, DHS is withdrawing the
proposed rule published on January 27,
2005 (FR Doc. 05–1240, 70 FR 3984).
Dated: August 11, 2008.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–19322 Filed 8–19–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–97–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No. 90; Docket No. TTB–2008–0009]
RIN 1513–AB57
Proposed Expansions of the Russian
River Valley and Northern Sonoma
Viticultural Areas (2008R–031P)
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax
and Trade Bureau proposes to expand
the Russian River Valley and Northern
Sonoma American viticultural areas in
Sonoma County, California. The Russian
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
49123
River Valley viticultural area proposed
expansion of 14,044 acres would
increase the size of that viticultural area
to 169,028 acres. The Northern Sonoma
viticultural area proposed expansion of
approximately 44,244 acres would
increase the size of that viticultural area
to 394,088 acres. We designate
viticultural areas to allow vintners to
better describe the origin of their wines
and to allow consumers to better
identify wines they may purchase. We
invite comments on this proposed
change to our regulations.
DATES: We must receive written
comments on or before October 20,
2008.
You may send comments to
any of the following addresses:
• https://www.regulations.gov (via the
online comment form for this notice as
posted within Docket No. TTB–2008–
0009 at ‘‘Regulations.gov,’’ the Federal
e-rulemaking portal); or
• Director, Regulations and Rulings
Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, P.O. Box 14412,
Washington, DC 20044–4412.
See the Public Participation section of
this notice for specific instructions and
requirements for submitting comments,
and for information on how to request
a public hearing.
You may view copies of this notice,
selected supporting materials, and any
comments we receive about this
proposal at https://www.regulations.gov
within Docket No. TTB–2008–0009. A
link to that docket is posted on the TTB
Web site at https://www.ttb.gov/wine/
wine_rulemaking.shtml under Notice
No. 90. You also may view copies of this
notice, all related petitions, maps or
other supporting materials, and any
comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB
Information Resource Center, 1310 G
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20220.
Please call 202–927–2400 to make an
appointment.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jennifer Berry, Alcohol and Tobacco
Tax and Trade Bureau, Regulations and
Rulings Division, P.O. Box 18152,
Roanoke, VA 24014; telephone (540)
344–9333.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority
Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act), 27
U.S.C. 205(e), authorizes the Secretary
of the Treasury to prescribe regulations
for the labeling of wine, distilled spirits,
and malt beverages. The FAA Act
requires that these regulations, among
E:\FR\FM\20AUP1.SGM
20AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 20, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 49122-49123]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-19322]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
8 CFR Part 214
[CIS No. 2448-08; DHS Docket No. USCIS-2008-0024]
RIN 1615-AA82
Petitions for Aliens To Perform Nonagricultural Temporary
Services or Labor (H-2B): Withdrawal of Proposed Rule
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Withdrawal of proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is
withdrawing the proposed rule, Petitions for Aliens to Perform
Nonagricultural Temporary Services or Labor (H-2B), published on
January 27, 2005, in the Federal Register at 70 FR 3984. The rule
proposed significant changes to USCIS' regulations that were designed
to increase the effectiveness of the H-2B nonimmigrant visa
classification while providing protections for U.S. workers. The H-2B
nonimmigrant visa classification applies to foreign workers to perform
nonagricultural temporary labor or services. The proposed rule would
have established a one-step petition process for U.S. employers seeking
H-2B temporary workers eliminating the need for U.S. employers to apply
for a labor certification from the Department of Labor (DOL); required
electronic filing of the Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, Form I-
129, within 60 days in advance of the requested employment start date;
eliminated the use of agents as H-2B petitioners; and, established new
management mechanisms allowing USCIS to maintain the integrity of the
program. In light of the public's comments, USCIS is no longer moving
forward with the proposed rule as designed and will publish a new
proposed rule for public comments.
DATES: The proposed rule, published on January 27, 2005 (70 FR 3984),
is withdrawn as of August 20, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hiroko Witherow, Service Center
Operations, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of
Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20529,
telephone (202) 272-8410.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Purpose of the Proposed Rule
The H-2 temporary worker program has existed without substantial
modification since 1952. The
[[Page 49123]]
Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 divided H-2 workers into two
categories: Temporary workers to perform agricultural labor or services
(H-2A), and all other temporary workers (H-2B). In 1990, Congress
attached a limitation on the number of H-2B workers, but otherwise the
program has not significantly changed to accommodate employers' needs
or to offer worker protections. After consulting with DOL and the
Department of State, and reviewing the definitions and procedures used
to regulate the H-2B nonagricultural temporary worker program, USCIS
determined that the H-2B process should be modified to reduce
unnecessary burdens that hinder petitioning employers' ability to
effectively use this visa category. The proposed rule was published on
January 27, 2005, with its intent being to increase efficiency in the
program by removing existing regulatory barriers. 70 FR 3984.
II. Changes Contained in the Proposed Rule
The most significant proposed change was a migration to a one-stop
attestation-based process whereby most U.S. employers seeking H-2B
temporary workers would only be required to file one application, the
Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, with USCIS. The
proposal would have reduced the paper-based application process by
requiring that most Form I-129 petitions be submitted to USCIS
electronically through e-filing. The proposal would also have required
e-filed petitions to be filed not more than 60 days in advance of the
employment need. The proposed rule also would have precluded agents
from filing H-2B petitions on behalf of the actual H-2B employer.
Finally, the proposed rule included additional changes to ensure the
integrity of the program through enforcement mechanisms.
III. Comments Received on the Proposed Rule
USCIS received 125 comments on the proposed rule during the 60-day
comment period. The majority of the commenters were opposed to many
changes proposed in the rule. The comments are summarized as follows:
There were a significant number of negative comments
regarding the proposal to create a one-stop attestation-based process.
Some commenters stated that the existing labor certification process
should remain with DOL because DOL, not USCIS, is directly charged with
the protection of U.S. workers. Some also expressed concern that this
change would lead to widespread fraud and misrepresentation.
A considerable number of commenters were in opposition to the
proposed change requiring that petitioners e-file a petition within 60
days in advance of the employment need. Some raised concern that many
employers are not necessarily well-versed in the access and use of the
Internet.
A significant number of comments were opposed to the
proposal to eliminate agents. Many commenters stressed that agents
perform a vital function in the H-2B filing process on behalf of the
employers who are not conversant with the applicable laws and
regulations related to the H-2B program.
The majority of the comments stressed that the proposed
changes would result in decreased protections for U.S. workers and the
likely proliferation of fraud within the program.
Based upon a review of the rulemaking record as a whole, DHS has
decided to withdraw the January 27, 2005, proposed rule and terminate
the associated proposed rulemaking action. DHS, therefore, will not
publish specific responses to each comment.
IV. Withdrawal of the Proposed Rule
For the reasons described in this document, DHS is withdrawing the
proposed rule published on January 27, 2005 (FR Doc. 05-1240, 70 FR
3984).
Dated: August 11, 2008.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-19322 Filed 8-19-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-97-P