Schedule of Fees for Consular Services, Department of State and Overseas Embassies and Consulates, 76032-76035 [2011-31175]
Download as PDF
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
76032
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
requirements and efficient
administration of the Act by eliminating
unnecessary follow-up contact.
(c) Covered types of services. The
services covered by the BE–120 include
sales and purchases for the following
transactions (transaction types 1–8
include rights to use, rights to
distribute, or outright sales or
purchases):
(1) Rights related to industrial
processes and products;
(2) Rights related to books, CD’s,
digital music, etc.;
(3) Rights related to trademarks;
(4) Rights related to performances and
events pre-recorded on motion picture
film and TV tape (including digital
recordings);
(5) Rights related to broadcast and
recording of live performances and
events;
(6) Rights related to general use
computer software;
(7) Business format franchising fees;
(8) Other intellectual property;
(9) Accounting, auditing, and
bookkeeping services;
(10) Advertising services;
(11) Auxiliary insurance services;
(12) Computer and data processing
services;
(13) Construction services;
(14) Data base and other information
services;
(15) Educational and training services;
(16) Engineering, architectural, and
surveying services;
(17) Financial services (purchases
only);
(18) Industrial engineering services;
(19) Industrial-type maintenance,
installation, alteration, and training
services;
(20) Legal services;
(21) Management, consulting, and
public relations services (includes
expenses allocated to/from a parent and
its affiliates);
(22) Merchanting services;
(23) Mining services;
(24) Operational leasing services;
(25) Trade-related services, other than
merchanting services;
(26) Performing arts, sports, and other
live performances, presentations, and
events;
(27) Premiums paid on primary
insurance (payments only);
(28) Losses recovered on primary
insurance;
(29) Research and development
services;
(30) Telecommunications services;
(31) Agricultural services;
(32) Contract manufacturing services;
(33) Disbursements to fund
production costs of motion pictures;
(34) Disbursements to fund newsgathering costs and production costs of
program material other than news;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Dec 05, 2011
Jkt 226001
(35) Waste treatment and depollution
services; and
(36) Other selected services.
[FR Doc. 2011–30914 Filed 12–5–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–06–P
Background
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 22
[Public Notice 7706]
RIN 1400–AC57
Schedule of Fees for Consular
Services, Department of State and
Overseas Embassies and Consulates
AGENCY:
Bureau of Consular Affairs,
State.
ACTION:
Final rule.
This rule adopts without
change the interim final rule published
in the Federal Register, 75 FR 28188, on
May 20, 2010 (Public Notice 7018).
Specifically, the rule proposed changes
to the Schedule of Fees for Consular
Services (Schedule) for nonimmigrant
visa and border crossing card
application processing fees. This
rulemaking adopts as final the change
from $131 to $140 for the fee charged for
the processing of an application for
most non-petition-based nonimmigrant
visas (Machine-Readable Visas or
MRVs) and adult Border Crossing Cards
(BCCs). The rule also provides new tiers
of the application fee for certain
categories of petition-based
nonimmigrant visas and treaty trader
and investor visas. Finally, the rule
adopts as final the increase in the BCC
fee charged to Mexican citizens under
age 15 who apply in Mexico, and whose
parent or guardian already has a BCC or
is applying for one, from $13 to $14.
This latter change results from a
congressionally mandated surcharge
that went into effect in 2009.
The Department of State is adjusting
the fees to ensure that sufficient
resources are available to meet the costs
of providing consular services in light of
an independent cost of service study’s
findings that the U.S. Government is not
fully covering its costs for the
processing of these visas under the
current cost structure. The Department
endeavors to recover the cost of
providing services that benefit specific
individuals, as opposed to the general
public. See OMB Circular A–25, section
6(a)(1), (a)(2)(a). For this reason, the
Department has adjusted the Schedule.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is
effective December 6, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Polly Hill, Office of the Comptroller,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Bureau of Consular Affairs, Department
of State; phone: (202) 663–1301, telefax:
(202) 663–2599; email: fees@state.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Sfmt 4700
For the complete explanation of the
background of this rule, including the
rationale for it, the Department’s
authority to make the fee changes in
question, and an explanation of the
CoSM that produced the fee amounts,
consult the prior public notices: 75 FR
66076 (Dec. 14, 2009); 75 FR 14111
(Mar. 24, 2010); and 75 FR 28188 (May
20, 2010).
The Department published a proposed
rule in the Federal Register, 74 FR
66076, on December 14, 2009, proposing
to amend 22 CFR 22.1. Specifically, the
rule proposed changes to the Schedule
of Fees for Consular Services for
nonimmigrant visa and border crossing
card application processing fees, and
provided 60 days for comments from the
public. In response to requests by the
public for more information and a
further opportunity to submit
comments, the Department published a
supplementary notice in the Federal
Register, 75 FR 14111, on March 24,
2010. The supplementary notice
provided a more detailed explanation of
the CoSM, the activity-based costing
model that the Department used to
determine the proposed fees for
consular services, and reopened the
comment period for an additional 15
days. During this and the previous 60day comment period, 81 comments were
received, either by email or through the
submission process at
www.regulations.gov. The Department
analyzed these 81 comments in the
interim final rule at 75 FR 28188,
28190–82, and does not reproduce that
analysis here. Instead, the current notice
addresses only the additional comments
received in the further 60 days during
which the comment period for this
interim final rule was open. In total, the
public has been given 135 days to
comment on this change to the Schedule
of Fees.
This rule establishes the following
fees for these categories corresponding
to projected cost figures for the visa
category as determined by the CoSM.
These fees incorporate the $1
Wilberforce surcharge that must be
added to all nonimmigrant MRVs, see
Public Law 110–457, Title II, § 239(a):
—H, L, O, P, Q, and R: $150;
—E: $390; and
—K: $350.
The Department rounded these fees to
the nearest $10 for the ease of
converting to foreign currencies, which
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
are most often used to pay the fee. The
additional revenue resulting from this
rounding will be used to cover the costs
of Global Support Strategy (GSS)
services.
Analysis of Comments
The proposed rule was published for
comment on December 14, 2009. During
the comment period, which initially
closed February 12, 2010 and was
subsequently extended until April 8,
2010, the Department received 81
comments. For an analysis of those
comments, please see the interim final
rule in the Federal Register, 75 FR
14111, published May 20, 2010 (Public
Notice 7018).
The Department published the
interim final rule on May 20, 2010, and
reopened the comment period for an
additional 60 days. During that
comment period, which closed on July
19, 2010, the Department received an
additional nine comments. The
following analysis addresses these nine
comments. Of the nine, three were in
support of the increase. Reasons for
support included endorsement of the fee
changes as necessary to allow the
Department to meet its budget.
Two comments criticized the
´
increased K-category fiancé(e) visa fee,
arguing that the increase in the K visa
fee will make it more difficult for U.S.
citizens to bring their loved ones to the
United States. While the Department
appreciates the financial difficulties that
increased fees can create, it has
determined that it must recover the cost
of providing the service. The
Department is adjusting the fee for K´
category fiancé(e) visas from $131 to
$350 specifically because adjudicating
the K visa requires a review of extensive
documentation and a more in-depth
interview of the applicant than other
categories of Machine Readable Visas
(MRVs). Rather than setting a single
MRV fee applicable to all MRVs
regardless of category as was done in the
past, the Department has concluded that
it will be more equitable to set the fee
for each MRV category at a level
commensurate with the average cost of
producing that particular product. The
more extensive K visa processing
procedure requires pre-processing of the
case at the National Visa Center, where
the petition is received from the
Department of Homeland Security
(DHS), packaged, and assigned to the
appropriate embassy or consulate. K
visa processing also requires intake and
review of materials not required by
some other categories of nonimmigrant
visas, such as the I–134 affidavit of
support and the DS–2054 medical
examination report. See 75 FR 14111,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Dec 05, 2011
Jkt 226001
14113 (discussing some of the extra
steps needed to process a K visa).
The higher incidence of fraud in K
visa applications also requires, in many
cases, a more extensive fraud
investigation than is necessary for some
other types of visa. Indeed, the
Department of State’s processing of K
visas is almost identical to that required
for a family-based immigrant visa, so it
follows that the costs of K visa
processing are similar to those for
immigrant visas. Spouses, children, and
parents applying for immigrant visas to
the United States currently pay the
Department of State a $330 application
processing fee as well as a $74
immigrant visa security surcharge, Items
32 and 36 on the Schedule of Fees.
The Department received three
comments from the same commenter
concerning instances in which specific
subsets of E-category or H-category visas
appear to the commenter to require
simpler processing, and suggesting that
those subsets should pay lower fees
than standard E and H applicants. The
Department decided to charge a higher
fee for visa categories that require more
complex processing, seeing this as a
more equitable solution than spreading
the additional cost to produce certain
visa categories (H, L, O, P, Q, R, E, and
K) across all visa categories. The
commenter appears not to challenge this
decision as concerns tiered fees for visa
categories more broadly. He argued,
however, that there is no reason to
charge more than $140—the base MRV
fee—to Singaporean and Chilean H–1B1
visa applicants; such applicants, if
approved, qualify for non-petition-based
visas to work in a specialty occupation
under legislation implementing treaties
between the United States and those
countries. The commenter made a
similar argument with respect to E–3
visas issued to Australian applicants
pursuant to legislation that authorizes
non-petition based visas for Australians
to work in a specialty occupation; he
argued that E–3s should cost the same
as H–1B1 visas for Singaporean and
Chilean applicants and thus have the
same fee. Another commenter suggested
that the costs of processing E visas for
spouses and children must be less than
for principal applicants, and that
therefore these derivative applicants
should be charged a lower fee.
Yet as the proposed and interim final
rules explained, the CoSM showed that
some categories of visa require more
time and resources to process than
others. On average, H-category visas
require the Department to perform a
number of additional tasks and
processes beyond those that are
necessary for producing a BCC or other
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76033
MRV, including review of extensive
documentation and a more in-depth
interview of the applicant. E-category
visas require considerably more tasks on
average than H-category visas and most
other MRV categories. The Department
has previously explained that, because
E–3 visas are not petition-based when
issued overseas, they require the
Department of State visa adjudicator to
both determine whether the
employment falls under the E–3
program (similar to the work DHS
performs in adjudicating a petition), and
assess the eligibility of the applicant;
this process is more like that required
for other E visas than the process for
most H visas, for which DHS has
already adjudicated a petition. See 75
FR 28188, 28191.
In addition, the fees established by
this rule are based on unit costs—global
average costs for service types as a
whole. The most recent CoSM, on
which the new Schedule of Fees is
based, improved substantially upon
prior cost of service models by
identifying unit costs not just for
nonimmigrant visas as a whole, but for
specific visa classes that involved more
work (e.g., H, E, K, etc.). This CoSM did
not, however, distinguish between
subcategories of visas (e.g., E–1 versus
E–3; H versus H–1B1). Instead, the cost
model averaged together the cost of
processing all subcategories of a
particular type of visa. Admittedly, the
amount of resources required to
adjudicate individual applicants can
vary significantly from case to case. As
an example, a B1/B2 applicant could be
a individual with a long history of good
travel to the United States, and the
adjudication could be made in just
minutes; a different B1/B2 applicant
could, however, be seeking to travel to
the United States for extensive medical
care over a period of years, which
would require the officer to spend much
more time considering the case before
making a decision. The Department
does not, however, charge these
applicants different fees based on the
time spent. The cost of the more timeconsuming case and the cost of the less
time-consuming case are both taken into
account in determining an average unit
cost for the visa category. In the same
vein, the time spent adjudicating a
principal applicant for an E–1 visa
generally will take more time than that
required to adjudicate that applicant’s
minor, accompanying children; the
application fee charged to those
applicants is based on a unit cost that
takes into account both the higher-cost
and the lower-cost processing. The
Government Accountability Office
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
76034
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
(GAO) has noted that government
agencies should define the classes of
persons subject to their fees by the
‘‘smallest unit that is practical.’’ GAO, 3
Principles of Federal Appropriations
Law (3d ed. 2008) 12–161 (citing
Electronic Industries Ass’n v. FCC, 554
F. 2d 1109, 1116 (DC Cir. 1976)). The
Department determined that
establishing four separate tiers of fees in
this latest Schedule, based on visa
category, was equitable and practical.
The Department will explore the
practicability of expanding in a future
fee schedule the number of separate unit
costs examined in the CoSM to the visa
subcategory level, while keeping in
mind the need to balance the
administrative burden with the
potential benefit to applicants.
A comment submitted jointly by
United Airlines, Inc., and the U.S.
Travel Association expressed concerns
about how the CoSM ensured that
administrative support costs were
correctly attributed to individual
consular services, and urged that costs
for positions not dedicated to fee-based
consular activities be excluded from the
CoSM. As previously stated, to address
the sharing and allocation of
administrative support costs at
embassies and consulates, the
Department uses the International
Cooperative Administrative Support
Services (ICASS). The CoSM includes
not all Department of State ICASS costs,
but rather only the share of those costs
equal to the share of consular ‘‘desks’’
at all embassies and consulates. The
consular share of ICASS costs was then
assigned within the model to all
overseas services. While the Department
will continue to endeavor to assign and
allocate costs in the most accurate
manner possible, its CoSM includes all
costs for consular services—whether a
fee is charged for those services or not.
The Department will review, and
continuously seek to keep accurate, the
calculations used for allocating ICASS
costs to specific service types.
U.S.C. 553(d)(3). See 75 F.R. at 28192–
28193.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rulemaking is subject to the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq; however, no action is required
under this Act. The Department has
reviewed this rule and, by approving it,
certifies that it will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities as
defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6). This rule
raises the application processing fee for
nonimmigrant visas. Although the
issuance of some of these visas is
contingent upon approval by DHS of a
petition filed by a U.S. company with
DHS, and these companies pay a fee to
DHS to cover the processing of the
petition, the visa itself is sought and
paid for by an individual foreign
national overseas who seeks to come to
the United States for a temporary stay.
The amount of the petition fees that are
paid by small entities to DHS is not
controlled by the amount of the visa fees
paid by individuals to the Department
of State. While small entities may be
required to cover or reimburse
employees for application fees, the exact
number of such entities that does so is
unknown. Given that the increase in
petition fees accounts for only 7 percent
of the total percentage of visa fee
increases, the modest 15 percent
increase in the application fee for
employment-based nonimmigrant visas
is not likely to have a significant
economic impact on the small entities
that choose to reimburse the applicant
for the visa fee.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Regulatory Findings
Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995
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 year, and it will not significantly
or uniquely affect small governments.
Therefore, no actions were deemed
necessary under the provisions of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995, 2 U.S.C. 1501–1504.
Administrative Procedure Act
The provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553 and
554 have been followed through the
course of this rule making, and the
Department cannot identify any adverse
impact on the conduct of foreign affairs
from the use of these procedures. This
final rule is effective upon publication.
This rule was previously published as
an interim final rule on May 20, 2010,
with an effective date 15 days from the
date of that publication (i.e., on June 4,
2010). The Department provided ‘‘good
cause’’ justification at that time under 5
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as
defined by section 804 of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996. See 5 U.S.C.
804(2). This rule will not result in an
annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more; a major increase in
costs or prices for consumers,
individual industries, federal, state, or
local government agencies, or
geographic regions; or significant
adverse effects on competition,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Dec 05, 2011
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
employment, investment, productivity,
innovation, or on the ability of United
States-based enterprises to compete
with foreign-based enterprises in
domestic and export markets.
Executive Order 12866
OMB considers this rule to be a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
Executive Order 12866, section 3(f),
Regulatory Planning and Review,
September 30, 1993. Accordingly, this
rule was submitted to OMB for review.
This rule is necessary in light of the
Department of State’s CoSM finding that
the cost of processing nonimmigrant
visas has increased since the fee was
last set in 2007. The Department is
setting the nonimmigrant visa fees in
accordance with 31 U.S.C. 9701 and
other applicable legal authority, as
described in detail in other notices
associated with this rulemaking (RIN
1400–AC57). See, e.g., 31 U.S.C.
9701(b)(2)(A) (agency head may
prescribe regulations establishing charge
for service or thing of value provided by
agency based on, inter alia, costs to
Government). This regulation sets the
fees for nonimmigrant visas at the
amount required to recover the costs
associated with providing this service to
foreign nationals.
Executive Order 13563
The Department of State has
considered this rule in light of
Executive Order 13563, dated January
18, 2011, and affirms that this regulation
is consistent with the guidance therein.
Executive Orders 12372 and 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, it is determined that this
rule does not have sufficient federalism
implications to require consultations or
warrant the preparation of a federalism
summary impact statement. The
regulations implementing Executive
Order 12372 regarding
intergovernmental consultation on
federal programs and activities do not
apply to this rule.
Executive Order 13175
The Department has determined that
this rulemaking will not have tribal
implications, will not impose
substantial direct compliance costs on
Indian tribal governments, and will not
preempt tribal law. Accordingly, the
requirements of section 5 of Executive
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
76035
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Order 13175 do not apply to this
rulemaking.
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 22
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose any new or
modify any existing reporting or
recordkeeping requirements subject to
the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35.
Consular services, fees, passports and
visas.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in
the preamble, 22 CFR part 22 is
amended as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101 note, 1153 note,
1183a note, 1351, 1351 note, 1713, 1714,
1714 note; 10 U.S.C. 2602(c); 11 U.S.C. 1157
note; 22 U.S.C. 214, 214 note, 1475e, 2504(a),
4201, 4206, 4215, 4219, 6551; 31 U.S.C. 9701;
Exec. Order 10,718, 22 FR 4632 (1957); Exec.
Order 11,295, 31 FR 10603 (1966).
2. Revise § 22.1 Item 21 to read as
follows:
■
PART 22—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 22 is
revised to read as follows:
■
§ 22.1
*
Schedule of fees.
*
*
*
*
SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR CONSULAR SERVICES
Item No.
*
*
*
Fee
*
Nonimmigrant Visa Services
*
*
*
21. Nonimmigrant visa and border crossing card application processing fees (per person):
(a) Non-petition-based nonimmigrant visa (except E category) ...........................................................................................................
(b) H, L, O, P, Q and R category nonimmigrant visa ..........................................................................................................................
(c) E category nonimmigrant visa ........................................................................................................................................................
(d) K category nonimmigrant visa ........................................................................................................................................................
(e) Border crossing card—age 15 and over (valid 10 years) ..............................................................................................................
(f) Border crossing card—under age 15; for Mexican citizens if parent or guardian has or is applying for a border crossing card
(valid 10 years or until the applicant reaches age 15, whichever is sooner) ...................................................................................
*
*
*
Dated: August 9, 2011.
Patrick F. Kennedy,
Under Secretary of State for Management,
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2011–31175 Filed 12–5–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 126
RIN 1400–AD00
[Public Notice 7708]
Amendment to the International Traffic
in Arms Regulations: Additional
Method of Electronic Payment of
Registration Fees
Department of State.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of State is
amending the International Traffic in
Arms Regulations (ITAR) to identify the
Federal Reserve Wire Network
(FedWire) as another method of
electronic payment of registration fees,
so as to provide a choice in and
facilitate the submission of fees by
registrants.
DATES: This rule is effective December 6,
2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tanya A. Phillips, Office of Defense
Trade Controls Compliance, U.S.
Department of State, telephone (202)
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Dec 05, 2011
Jkt 226001
*
*
632–2797, or email
DDTCResponseTeam@state.gov. ATTN:
Registration—Additional Method of
Electronic Payment of Registration Fees.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Directorate of Defense Trade Controls
(DDTC) is responsible for the collection
of registration fees from persons in the
business of manufacturing, exporting,
and/or brokering defense articles or
defense services.
On February 24, 2011, the Department
proposed electronic payment as the sole
method of the submission of registration
fees (see the proposed rule,
‘‘Amendment to the International
Traffic in Arms Regulations: Electronic
Payment of Registration Fees; 60-Day
Notice of the Proposed Statement of
Registration Information Collection,’’ 76
FR 10291). That proposal received no
public comment within the established
comment period. The final rule (76 FR
45195, July 28, 2011) took effect on
September 26, 2011, and identified
Automated Clearing House (ACH) as the
means by which U.S. entities may
electronically submit their registration
fees.
Since the implementation of that rule,
a considerable number of intended
registrants have contacted the
Department, inquiring if payment may
be made using the Federal Reserve Wire
Network (FedWire), as they were
experiencing difficulties in originating
ACH transactions. This rule seeks to
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
$140
$150
$390
$350
$140
$14
*
address these concerns. Therefore, to
§§ 122.2 and 129.4 of the ITAR, where
registration fee payment is described,
FedWire is added as an acceptable
electronic payment method.
Regulatory Analysis and Notices
Administrative Procedure Act
The Department of State is of the
opinion that controlling the import and
export of defense articles and services is
a foreign affairs function of the United
States Government and that rules
implementing this function are exempt
from section 553 (Rulemaking) and
section 554 (Adjudications) of the
Administrative Procedure Act. Since the
Department is of the opinion that this
rule is exempt from 5 U.S.C. 553, it is
the view of the Department of State that
the provisions of section 553(d) do not
apply to this rulemaking.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Since this amendment is not subject
to 5 U.S.C. 553, it does not require
analysis under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995
This amendment does not involve a
mandate that will 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 year and it will not significantly
or uniquely affect small governments.
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 234 (Tuesday, December 6, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76032-76035]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-31175]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 22
[Public Notice 7706]
RIN 1400-AC57
Schedule of Fees for Consular Services, Department of State and
Overseas Embassies and Consulates
AGENCY: Bureau of Consular Affairs, State.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule adopts without change the interim final rule
published in the Federal Register, 75 FR 28188, on May 20, 2010 (Public
Notice 7018). Specifically, the rule proposed changes to the Schedule
of Fees for Consular Services (Schedule) for nonimmigrant visa and
border crossing card application processing fees. This rulemaking
adopts as final the change from $131 to $140 for the fee charged for
the processing of an application for most non-petition-based
nonimmigrant visas (Machine-Readable Visas or MRVs) and adult Border
Crossing Cards (BCCs). The rule also provides new tiers of the
application fee for certain categories of petition-based nonimmigrant
visas and treaty trader and investor visas. Finally, the rule adopts as
final the increase in the BCC fee charged to Mexican citizens under age
15 who apply in Mexico, and whose parent or guardian already has a BCC
or is applying for one, from $13 to $14. This latter change results
from a congressionally mandated surcharge that went into effect in
2009.
The Department of State is adjusting the fees to ensure that
sufficient resources are available to meet the costs of providing
consular services in light of an independent cost of service study's
findings that the U.S. Government is not fully covering its costs for
the processing of these visas under the current cost structure. The
Department endeavors to recover the cost of providing services that
benefit specific individuals, as opposed to the general public. See OMB
Circular A-25, section 6(a)(1), (a)(2)(a). For this reason, the
Department has adjusted the Schedule.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective December 6, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Polly Hill, Office of the Comptroller,
Bureau of Consular Affairs, Department of State; phone: (202) 663-1301,
telefax: (202) 663-2599; email: fees@state.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
For the complete explanation of the background of this rule,
including the rationale for it, the Department's authority to make the
fee changes in question, and an explanation of the CoSM that produced
the fee amounts, consult the prior public notices: 75 FR 66076 (Dec.
14, 2009); 75 FR 14111 (Mar. 24, 2010); and 75 FR 28188 (May 20, 2010).
The Department published a proposed rule in the Federal Register,
74 FR 66076, on December 14, 2009, proposing to amend 22 CFR 22.1.
Specifically, the rule proposed changes to the Schedule of Fees for
Consular Services for nonimmigrant visa and border crossing card
application processing fees, and provided 60 days for comments from the
public. In response to requests by the public for more information and
a further opportunity to submit comments, the Department published a
supplementary notice in the Federal Register, 75 FR 14111, on March 24,
2010. The supplementary notice provided a more detailed explanation of
the CoSM, the activity-based costing model that the Department used to
determine the proposed fees for consular services, and reopened the
comment period for an additional 15 days. During this and the previous
60-day comment period, 81 comments were received, either by email or
through the submission process at www.regulations.gov. The Department
analyzed these 81 comments in the interim final rule at 75 FR 28188,
28190-82, and does not reproduce that analysis here. Instead, the
current notice addresses only the additional comments received in the
further 60 days during which the comment period for this interim final
rule was open. In total, the public has been given 135 days to comment
on this change to the Schedule of Fees.
This rule establishes the following fees for these categories
corresponding to projected cost figures for the visa category as
determined by the CoSM. These fees incorporate the $1 Wilberforce
surcharge that must be added to all nonimmigrant MRVs, see Public Law
110-457, Title II, Sec. 239(a):
--H, L, O, P, Q, and R: $150;
--E: $390; and
--K: $350.
The Department rounded these fees to the nearest $10 for the ease
of converting to foreign currencies, which
[[Page 76033]]
are most often used to pay the fee. The additional revenue resulting
from this rounding will be used to cover the costs of Global Support
Strategy (GSS) services.
Analysis of Comments
The proposed rule was published for comment on December 14, 2009.
During the comment period, which initially closed February 12, 2010 and
was subsequently extended until April 8, 2010, the Department received
81 comments. For an analysis of those comments, please see the interim
final rule in the Federal Register, 75 FR 14111, published May 20, 2010
(Public Notice 7018).
The Department published the interim final rule on May 20, 2010,
and reopened the comment period for an additional 60 days. During that
comment period, which closed on July 19, 2010, the Department received
an additional nine comments. The following analysis addresses these
nine comments. Of the nine, three were in support of the increase.
Reasons for support included endorsement of the fee changes as
necessary to allow the Department to meet its budget.
Two comments criticized the increased K-category fiancé(e)
visa fee, arguing that the increase in the K visa fee will make it more
difficult for U.S. citizens to bring their loved ones to the United
States. While the Department appreciates the financial difficulties
that increased fees can create, it has determined that it must recover
the cost of providing the service. The Department is adjusting the fee
for K-category fiancé(e) visas from $131 to $350 specifically
because adjudicating the K visa requires a review of extensive
documentation and a more in-depth interview of the applicant than other
categories of Machine Readable Visas (MRVs). Rather than setting a
single MRV fee applicable to all MRVs regardless of category as was
done in the past, the Department has concluded that it will be more
equitable to set the fee for each MRV category at a level commensurate
with the average cost of producing that particular product. The more
extensive K visa processing procedure requires pre-processing of the
case at the National Visa Center, where the petition is received from
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), packaged, and assigned to
the appropriate embassy or consulate. K visa processing also requires
intake and review of materials not required by some other categories of
nonimmigrant visas, such as the I-134 affidavit of support and the DS-
2054 medical examination report. See 75 FR 14111, 14113 (discussing
some of the extra steps needed to process a K visa).
The higher incidence of fraud in K visa applications also requires,
in many cases, a more extensive fraud investigation than is necessary
for some other types of visa. Indeed, the Department of State's
processing of K visas is almost identical to that required for a
family-based immigrant visa, so it follows that the costs of K visa
processing are similar to those for immigrant visas. Spouses, children,
and parents applying for immigrant visas to the United States currently
pay the Department of State a $330 application processing fee as well
as a $74 immigrant visa security surcharge, Items 32 and 36 on the
Schedule of Fees.
The Department received three comments from the same commenter
concerning instances in which specific subsets of E-category or H-
category visas appear to the commenter to require simpler processing,
and suggesting that those subsets should pay lower fees than standard E
and H applicants. The Department decided to charge a higher fee for
visa categories that require more complex processing, seeing this as a
more equitable solution than spreading the additional cost to produce
certain visa categories (H, L, O, P, Q, R, E, and K) across all visa
categories. The commenter appears not to challenge this decision as
concerns tiered fees for visa categories more broadly. He argued,
however, that there is no reason to charge more than $140--the base MRV
fee--to Singaporean and Chilean H-1B1 visa applicants; such applicants,
if approved, qualify for non-petition-based visas to work in a
specialty occupation under legislation implementing treaties between
the United States and those countries. The commenter made a similar
argument with respect to E-3 visas issued to Australian applicants
pursuant to legislation that authorizes non-petition based visas for
Australians to work in a specialty occupation; he argued that E-3s
should cost the same as H-1B1 visas for Singaporean and Chilean
applicants and thus have the same fee. Another commenter suggested that
the costs of processing E visas for spouses and children must be less
than for principal applicants, and that therefore these derivative
applicants should be charged a lower fee.
Yet as the proposed and interim final rules explained, the CoSM
showed that some categories of visa require more time and resources to
process than others. On average, H-category visas require the
Department to perform a number of additional tasks and processes beyond
those that are necessary for producing a BCC or other MRV, including
review of extensive documentation and a more in-depth interview of the
applicant. E-category visas require considerably more tasks on average
than H-category visas and most other MRV categories. The Department has
previously explained that, because E-3 visas are not petition-based
when issued overseas, they require the Department of State visa
adjudicator to both determine whether the employment falls under the E-
3 program (similar to the work DHS performs in adjudicating a
petition), and assess the eligibility of the applicant; this process is
more like that required for other E visas than the process for most H
visas, for which DHS has already adjudicated a petition. See 75 FR
28188, 28191.
In addition, the fees established by this rule are based on unit
costs--global average costs for service types as a whole. The most
recent CoSM, on which the new Schedule of Fees is based, improved
substantially upon prior cost of service models by identifying unit
costs not just for nonimmigrant visas as a whole, but for specific visa
classes that involved more work (e.g., H, E, K, etc.). This CoSM did
not, however, distinguish between subcategories of visas (e.g., E-1
versus E-3; H versus H-1B1). Instead, the cost model averaged together
the cost of processing all subcategories of a particular type of visa.
Admittedly, the amount of resources required to adjudicate individual
applicants can vary significantly from case to case. As an example, a
B1/B2 applicant could be a individual with a long history of good
travel to the United States, and the adjudication could be made in just
minutes; a different B1/B2 applicant could, however, be seeking to
travel to the United States for extensive medical care over a period of
years, which would require the officer to spend much more time
considering the case before making a decision. The Department does not,
however, charge these applicants different fees based on the time
spent. The cost of the more time-consuming case and the cost of the
less time-consuming case are both taken into account in determining an
average unit cost for the visa category. In the same vein, the time
spent adjudicating a principal applicant for an E-1 visa generally will
take more time than that required to adjudicate that applicant's minor,
accompanying children; the application fee charged to those applicants
is based on a unit cost that takes into account both the higher-cost
and the lower-cost processing. The Government Accountability Office
[[Page 76034]]
(GAO) has noted that government agencies should define the classes of
persons subject to their fees by the ``smallest unit that is
practical.'' GAO, 3 Principles of Federal Appropriations Law (3d ed.
2008) 12-161 (citing Electronic Industries Ass'n v. FCC, 554 F. 2d
1109, 1116 (DC Cir. 1976)). The Department determined that establishing
four separate tiers of fees in this latest Schedule, based on visa
category, was equitable and practical. The Department will explore the
practicability of expanding in a future fee schedule the number of
separate unit costs examined in the CoSM to the visa subcategory level,
while keeping in mind the need to balance the administrative burden
with the potential benefit to applicants.
A comment submitted jointly by United Airlines, Inc., and the U.S.
Travel Association expressed concerns about how the CoSM ensured that
administrative support costs were correctly attributed to individual
consular services, and urged that costs for positions not dedicated to
fee-based consular activities be excluded from the CoSM. As previously
stated, to address the sharing and allocation of administrative support
costs at embassies and consulates, the Department uses the
International Cooperative Administrative Support Services (ICASS). The
CoSM includes not all Department of State ICASS costs, but rather only
the share of those costs equal to the share of consular ``desks'' at
all embassies and consulates. The consular share of ICASS costs was
then assigned within the model to all overseas services. While the
Department will continue to endeavor to assign and allocate costs in
the most accurate manner possible, its CoSM includes all costs for
consular services--whether a fee is charged for those services or not.
The Department will review, and continuously seek to keep accurate, the
calculations used for allocating ICASS costs to specific service types.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
The provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553 and 554 have been followed through
the course of this rule making, and the Department cannot identify any
adverse impact on the conduct of foreign affairs from the use of these
procedures. This final rule is effective upon publication. This rule
was previously published as an interim final rule on May 20, 2010, with
an effective date 15 days from the date of that publication (i.e., on
June 4, 2010). The Department provided ``good cause'' justification at
that time under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). See 75 F.R. at 28192-28193.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rulemaking is subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5
U.S.C. 601 et seq; however, no action is required under this Act. The
Department has reviewed this rule and, by approving it, certifies that
it will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6). This rule raises the
application processing fee for nonimmigrant visas. Although the
issuance of some of these visas is contingent upon approval by DHS of a
petition filed by a U.S. company with DHS, and these companies pay a
fee to DHS to cover the processing of the petition, the visa itself is
sought and paid for by an individual foreign national overseas who
seeks to come to the United States for a temporary stay. The amount of
the petition fees that are paid by small entities to DHS is not
controlled by the amount of the visa fees paid by individuals to the
Department of State. While small entities may be required to cover or
reimburse employees for application fees, the exact number of such
entities that does so is unknown. Given that the increase in petition
fees accounts for only 7 percent of the total percentage of visa fee
increases, the modest 15 percent increase in the application fee for
employment-based nonimmigrant visas is not likely to have a significant
economic impact on the small entities that choose to reimburse the
applicant for the visa fee.
Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995
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 year, and it will not significantly or uniquely
affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed necessary
under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2
U.S.C. 1501-1504.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by section 804 of the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. See 5
U.S.C. 804(2). This rule will not result in an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices
for consumers, individual industries, federal, state, or local
government agencies, or geographic regions; or significant adverse
effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity,
innovation, or on the ability of United States-based enterprises to
compete with foreign-based enterprises in domestic and export markets.
Executive Order 12866
OMB considers this rule to be a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866, section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and
Review, September 30, 1993. Accordingly, this rule was submitted to OMB
for review. This rule is necessary in light of the Department of
State's CoSM finding that the cost of processing nonimmigrant visas has
increased since the fee was last set in 2007. The Department is setting
the nonimmigrant visa fees in accordance with 31 U.S.C. 9701 and other
applicable legal authority, as described in detail in other notices
associated with this rulemaking (RIN 1400-AC57). See, e.g., 31 U.S.C.
9701(b)(2)(A) (agency head may prescribe regulations establishing
charge for service or thing of value provided by agency based on, inter
alia, costs to Government). This regulation sets the fees for
nonimmigrant visas at the amount required to recover the costs
associated with providing this service to foreign nationals.
Executive Order 13563
The Department of State has considered this rule in light of
Executive Order 13563, dated January 18, 2011, and affirms that this
regulation is consistent with the guidance therein.
Executive Orders 12372 and 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, it is determined that this rule does not have
sufficient federalism implications to require consultations or warrant
the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. The
regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding
intergovernmental consultation on federal programs and activities do
not apply to this rule.
Executive Order 13175
The Department has determined that this rulemaking will not have
tribal implications, will not impose substantial direct compliance
costs on Indian tribal governments, and will not preempt tribal law.
Accordingly, the requirements of section 5 of Executive
[[Page 76035]]
Order 13175 do not apply to this rulemaking.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose any new or modify any existing reporting
or recordkeeping requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act,
44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 22
Consular services, fees, passports and visas.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the preamble, 22 CFR part 22
is amended as follows:
PART 22--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 22 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101 note, 1153 note, 1183a note, 1351,
1351 note, 1713, 1714, 1714 note; 10 U.S.C. 2602(c); 11 U.S.C. 1157
note; 22 U.S.C. 214, 214 note, 1475e, 2504(a), 4201, 4206, 4215,
4219, 6551; 31 U.S.C. 9701; Exec. Order 10,718, 22 FR 4632 (1957);
Exec. Order 11,295, 31 FR 10603 (1966).
0
2. Revise Sec. 22.1 Item 21 to read as follows:
Sec. 22.1 Schedule of fees.
* * * * *
Schedule of Fees for Consular Services
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item No. Fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Nonimmigrant Visa Services
------------------------------------------------------------------------
21. Nonimmigrant visa and border crossing card application
processing fees (per person):
(a) Non-petition-based nonimmigrant visa (except E $140
category)...............................................
(b) H, L, O, P, Q and R category nonimmigrant visa....... $150
(c) E category nonimmigrant visa......................... $390
(d) K category nonimmigrant visa......................... $350
(e) Border crossing card--age 15 and over (valid 10 $140
years)..................................................
(f) Border crossing card--under age 15; for Mexican $14
citizens if parent or guardian has or is applying for a
border crossing card (valid 10 years or until the
applicant reaches age 15, whichever is sooner)..........
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated: August 9, 2011.
Patrick F. Kennedy,
Under Secretary of State for Management, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2011-31175 Filed 12-5-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P