Expanding the Size of the Board of Immigration Appeals, 8321-8323 [2018-03980]
Download as PDF
8321
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 83, No. 39
Tuesday, February 27, 2018
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents.
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Executive Office for Immigration
Review
8 CFR Part 1003
[Docket No. EOIR 183; A.G. Order No. 4119–
2018]
RIN 1125–AA79
Expanding the Size of the Board of
Immigration Appeals
Executive Office for
Immigration Review, Department of
Justice.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This final rule amends the
Executive Office for Immigration
Review (EOIR) regulations relating to
the organization of the Board of
Immigration Appeals (Board) by adding
four additional Board member positions,
thereby expanding the Board to 21
members.
DATES: This rule is effective February
27, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lauren Alder Reid, Acting Chief of the
Immigration Law Division, Office of
Policy, Executive Office for Immigration
Review, 5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 1902,
Falls Church, VA 20530, telephone
(703) 305–0289 (not a toll-free call).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
I. Current Interim Rule
On June 3, 2015, the Department of
Justice (Department) published an
interim rule amending 8 CFR 1003.1 to
increase the Board of Immigration
Appeals (Board) from 15 to 17 members,
with a request for comments. 80 FR
31461 (June 3, 2015). As explained in
the interim rule, expanding the number
of Board members is necessary to
accomplish EOIR’s commitment to
promptly provide Board appellate
review of timely filed immigration case
appeals. The interim rule provided two
primary reasons for increasing the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:04 Feb 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
number of Board members from 15 to
17. First, EOIR was managing the largest
caseload the immigration court system
had ever seen. Second, the Department
was in the process of hiring a
substantial number of additional
immigration judges, which the
Department expected would increase
the number of appeals filed with the
Board.
The Department provided an
opportunity for post-promulgation
comment even though this was a rule of
internal agency organization and
therefore notice-and-comment
rulemaking was not required. The
Department received two comments by
the deadline of August 3, 2015. For the
reasons set forth below, the Department
is finalizing the interim rule amending
8 CFR part 1003, and adding four
additional Board members for a total of
21 Board members.
II. Background
EOIR administers the Nation’s
immigration court system. Generally,
cases commence before an immigration
judge when the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) files with the
immigration court a charging document
against an alien. See 8 CFR 1003.14(a).
EOIR primarily decides whether foreign
nationals whom DHS charges with
violating immigration law pursuant to
the Immigration and Nationality Act are
removable as charged and, if so,
whether they should be ordered
removed from the United States, or
should be granted protection or relief
from removal and be permitted to
remain in the United States. EOIR’s
Office of the Chief Immigration Judge
administers the adjudications of the
immigration judges nationwide.
Decisions of the immigration judges
are subject to review by EOIR’s
appellate body, the Board, which is
currently composed of 17 Board
members. The Board is the highest
administrative tribunal for interpreting
and applying U.S. immigration law. The
Board’s decisions can be reviewed by
the Attorney General, as provided in 8
CFR 1003.1(g) and (h). Decisions of the
Board and the Attorney General are
subject to judicial review in the United
States Courts of Appeals.
III. Expansion of Number of Board
Members
EOIR’s mission is to adjudicate
immigration cases by fairly,
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
expeditiously, and uniformly
interpreting and administering the
Nation’s immigration laws. This task
includes the initial adjudication of
aliens’ cases in immigration courts
nationwide, as well as appellate review
by the Board when appeals are timely
filed. In order to more efficiently
accomplish the agency’s commitment to
promptly decide an increasing volume
of cases, as well as to review appeals in
those cases, this rule serves to finalize
the interim rule, with the addition of
four additional Board members.1 This
rule adopts a revision to the third
sentence of 8 CFR 1003.1(a)(1). The
remainder of paragraph (a)(1) is
unchanged.
Expanding the number of Board
members was necessary when the
interim rule was published in 2015
because EOIR was experiencing an
increased caseload. Since the interim
rule’s publication, EOIR’s caseload has
continued to grow; EOIR is currently
managing the largest caseload the
immigration court system has ever seen.
At the end of FY 2016, there were
518,545 total cases pending before the
immigration courts, marking an increase
of 58,988 cases pending above those at
the end of FY 2015. See 2016 EOIR
Statistics Yearbook W1.2 As of January
1, 2018, there were 667,292 total cases
pending before the immigration courts.
This total increase included an increase
in the number of pending cases of
detained aliens. EOIR’s highest priority
is the efficient and timely adjudication
of detained alien cases, and EOIR
requires additional resources to handle
the increased caseload.
The Department is taking steps to
address the unprecedented pending
caseload. The Department hired 64
additional immigration judges in FY
2017 and continues to hire new
immigration judges. The Department
expects that, as these additional
immigration judges enter on duty, the
number of decisions rendered by the
immigration judges nationwide will
1 The Department previously expanded the
number of Board members—from 11 to 15
members—on December 7, 2006, when it published
in the Federal Register an interim rule amending
8 CFR 1003.1. 71 FR 70855 (Dec. 7, 2006). On June
16, 2008, the Department published a final rule
adopting, without change, that interim rule. 73 FR
33875 (June 16, 2008).
2 EOIR’s FY 2016 Statistics Yearbook, prepared by
EOIR’s Office of Planning, Analysis, and Statistics,
is available at https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/
file/fysb16/download.
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
8322
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 39 / Tuesday, February 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
increase, and the number of appeals
filed with the Board will increase as a
result. The Department is also taking a
number of management steps to more
efficiently address the pending
caseload, which EOIR expects will
result in an increase in immigration
judge decisions and, in turn, an increase
in the flow of appeals to the Board.3
Since January 2017, the Board has
experienced a steady increase in
appeals. For example, the number of
appeals increased throughout FY 2017,
from 2,618 in October 2016 to 3,035 in
September 2017. This caseload is
burdensome and, given current trends,
may become overwhelming were the
Board to maintain 17 members.
The interim rule modified the number
of Board members to 17, and requested
post-promulgation comment on the
proposal to increase the number of
Board members in light of the increased
caseload. Keeping in mind the goal of
maintaining cohesion and the ability to
reach consensus, but recognizing the
challenges the Board faces in light of its
current and anticipated increased
caseload, the Department has
determined that four additional
members should be added to the Board.
The Department acknowledges the
potential impact of the expansion to 21
members upon the Board’s ability to
provide coherent direction and to issue
precedential decisions, which require
approval of a majority of the Board, and
will continue to consider means to
improve the Board’s operations over
time. But the interim rule’s logic—
balancing efficiency with
administrability—supports increasing
the size of the Board in the final rule to
21. These changes will help support an
efficient system of appellate
adjudication in light of the increasing
caseload.
IV. Public Comments
The interim rule was exempt from the
usual requirements of prior notice and
comment and a 30-day delay in effective
date because, as an internal delegation
of authority, it is a rule of management
or personnel and relates to a matter of
agency organization, procedure, or
practice. See 5 U.S.C. 553(a), (b), (d).
Nonetheless, when promulgating the
interim rule, the Department provided
an opportunity for post-promulgation
comment. The Department received two
comments by the deadline, only one of
which was responsive to the rule. The
3 Statement
of James McHenry, Acting Director,
Executive Office for Immigration Review, United
States Department of Justice, Before the
Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security,
Committee on the Judiciary, United States House of
Representatives, November 1, 2017.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:04 Feb 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
commenter stated that ‘‘[e]xpanding the
Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) to
17 members from 15 members is . . . a
necessary action as the pending times
for appeals has substantially increased
as the docket of EOIR has expanded.’’
In response, the Department
appreciates this expression of support.
EOIR has steadily hired new
immigration judges, and continues to
hire new immigration judges, to
adjudicate EOIR’s historically large
caseload. As the number of immigration
judges increases, so does the number of
decisions rendered by immigration
judges. In turn, the number of appeals
filed with the Board also increases.
Increasing the number of Board
members will assist EOIR in
accomplishing its mission of
adjudicating appeals in a timely
manner.
V. Regulatory Requirements
A. Administrative Procedure Act
As this rule is the finalization of an
interim final rule, further request for
comment is not required. Alternately,
comment is unnecessary because this
final rule is a rule of management or
personnel as well as a rule of agency
organization, procedure, or practice. See
5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2), (b)(A). For the same
reasons, this rule is not subject to a 30day delay in effective date. See 5 U.S.C.
553(a)(2), (d).
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA), ‘‘[w]henever an agency is
required by section 553 of [the
Administrative Procedure Act], or any
other law, to publish general notice of
proposed rulemaking for any proposed
rule . . . the agency shall prepare and
make available for public comment an
initial regulatory flexibility analysis.’’ 5
U.S.C. 603(a); see 5 U.S.C. 604(a). Such
analysis is not required when a rule is
exempt from notice-and-comment
rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553(b).
Because this is a rule of internal agency
organization and therefore is exempt
from notice-and-comment rulemaking,
no RFA analysis under 5 U.S.C. 603 or
604 is required for this rule.
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform 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 one year, and it will not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. Therefore, no actions were
deemed necessary under the provisions
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995.
D. Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory
Planning and Review), 13563
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review), and 13771 (Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs)
This rule is limited to agency
organization, management, or personnel
matters and is therefore not subject to
review by the Office of Management and
Budget pursuant to section 3(d)(3) of
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review. Nevertheless, the
Department certifies that this regulation
has been drafted in accordance with the
principles of Executive Order 12866,
section 1(b), and Executive Order 13563.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits,
including consideration of potential
economic, environmental, public health,
and safety effects; distributive impacts;
and equity. The benefits of this rule
include providing the Department with
an appropriate means of responding to
the increased number of appeals to the
Board. The public will benefit from the
expansion of the number of Board
members because such expansion will
help EOIR better accomplish its mission
of adjudicating cases in an efficient and
timely manner. Overall, the benefits
provided by the Board’s expansion
outweigh the costs of employing
additional federal employees. Finally,
because this rule is one of internal
organization, management, or
personnel, it is not subject to the
requirements of Executive Order 13771.
E. Executive Order 13132—Federalism
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.
F. Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice
Reform
This rule meets the applicable
standards set forth in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988.
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 39 / Tuesday, February 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
The provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–
13, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, and its
implementing regulations, 5 CFR part
1320, do not apply to this final rule
because there are no new or revised
recordkeeping or reporting
requirements.
Federal Aviation Administration
H. Congressional Review Act
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus
Airplanes
This is not a major rule as defined by
5 U.S.C. 804(2). This action pertains to
agency organization, management, and
personnel and, accordingly, is not a
‘‘rule’’ as that term is used in 5 U.S.C.
804(3). Therefore, the reports to
Congress and the Government
Accountability Office specified by 5
U.S.C. 801 are not required.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 1003
Administrative practice and
procedure, Aliens, Immigration, Legal
services, Organization and functions
(Government agencies).
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in
the preamble, the interim rule amending
8 CFR part 1003, which was published
at 80 FR 31461 on June 3, 2015, is
adopted as a final rule, with the
following change:
PART 1003—EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR
IMMIGRATION REVIEW
1. The authority citation for part 1003
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 6 U.S.C. 521; 8
U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1154, 1155, 1158, 1182,
1226, 1229, 1229a, 1229b, 1229c, 1231,
1254a, 1255, 1324d, 1330, 1361, 1362; 28
U.S.C. 509, 510, 1746; sec. 2 Reorg. Plan No.
2 of 1950; 3 CFR, 1949–1953 Comp., p. 1002;
section 203 of Pub. L. 105–100, 111 Stat.
2196–200; sections 1506 and 1510 of Pub. L.
106–386, 114 Stat. 1527–29, 1531–32; section
1505 of Pub. L. 106–554, 114 Stat. 2763A–
326 to –328.
2. Amend § 1003.1 by revising the
third sentence of paragraph (a)(1) to
read as follows:
■
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
§ 1003.1 Organization, jurisdiction, and
powers of the Board of Immigration
Appeals.
(a)(1) * * * The Board shall consist of
21 members. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: February 20, 2018.
Jefferson B. Sessions III,
Attorney General.
[FR Doc. 2018–03980 Filed 2–26–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–30–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:04 Feb 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2016–9519; Product
Identifier 2016–NM–099–AD; Amendment
39–19200; AD 2018–04–05]
RIN 2120–AA64
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Airbus Model A319–112, A319–115,
A320–214, A320–232, and A321–211
airplanes. This AD was prompted by inservice experience and further analysis,
which showed that the galley 5 without
kick-load retainers, was unable to
withstand the expected loading during
several flight phases or in case of
emergency landing. This AD requires
modification of galley 5 trolley
compartments by adding kick-load
retainers. We are issuing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these
products.
SUMMARY:
8323
contains this AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for
the Docket Office (telephone 800–647–
5527) is Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M–30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport
Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone 206–231–3223; fax 206–231–
3398.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to
amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD
that would apply to certain Airbus
Model A319–112, A319–115, A320–214,
A320–232, and A321–211 airplanes.
The SNPRM published in the Federal
Register on November 9, 2017 (82 FR
52022) (‘‘the SNPRM’’). We preceded
the SNPRM with a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) that published in
the Federal Register on January 3, 2017
(82 FR 50) (‘‘the NPRM’’). The NPRM
was prompted by in-service experience
and further analysis, which showed that
DATES: This AD is effective April 3,
the galley 5 without kick-load retainers
2018.
was unable to withstand the expected
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference loading during several flight phases or
in case of an emergency landing. The
of certain publications listed in this AD
NPRM proposed to require modification
as of April 3, 2018.
of galley 5 trolley compartments by
ADDRESSES: For service information
adding kick-load retainers. The SNPRM
identified in this final rule, contact
proposed to modify the applicability.
Airbus, Airworthiness Office—EIAS, 1
We are issuing this AD to prevent
Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707
galley/trolley detachment and collapse
Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 into an adjacent cabin aisle or cabin
61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email zone, possibly spreading loose galley
account.airworth-eas@airbus.com;
equipment items, compartment doors,
internet https://www.airbus.com. You
or leaking fluids. These hazards could
may view this referenced service
block an evacuation route and result in
information at the FAA, Transport
injury to crew or passengers.
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th
The European Aviation Safety Agency
Street, Des Moines, WA. For
(EASA), which is the Technical Agent
information on the availability of this
for the Member States of the European
material at the FAA, call 206–231–3195. Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness
It is also available on the internet at
Directive 2016–0040, dated March 2,
https://www.regulations.gov by searching 2016 (referred to after this as the
for and locating Docket No. FAA–2016– Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness
9519.
Information, or ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct
an unsafe condition for certain Airbus
Examining the AD Docket
Model A319–112, A319–115, A320–214,
You may examine the AD docket on
A320–232, and A321–211 airplanes.
the internet at https://
The MCAI states:
www.regulations.gov by searching for
Following in-service experience and
and locating Docket No. FAA–2016–
further analyses, it was ascertained that the
9519; or in person at the Docket
galley 5 without kick load retainers on
Management Facility between 9 a.m.
external position could not withstand the
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
expected loading during several flight phases
except Federal holidays. The AD docket or in case of emergency landing.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 39 (Tuesday, February 27, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8321-8323]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03980]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 39 / Tuesday, February 27, 2018 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 8321]]
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Executive Office for Immigration Review
8 CFR Part 1003
[Docket No. EOIR 183; A.G. Order No. 4119-2018]
RIN 1125-AA79
Expanding the Size of the Board of Immigration Appeals
AGENCY: Executive Office for Immigration Review, Department of Justice.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule amends the Executive Office for Immigration
Review (EOIR) regulations relating to the organization of the Board of
Immigration Appeals (Board) by adding four additional Board member
positions, thereby expanding the Board to 21 members.
DATES: This rule is effective February 27, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren Alder Reid, Acting Chief of the
Immigration Law Division, Office of Policy, Executive Office for
Immigration Review, 5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 1902, Falls Church, VA
20530, telephone (703) 305-0289 (not a toll-free call).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Current Interim Rule
On June 3, 2015, the Department of Justice (Department) published
an interim rule amending 8 CFR 1003.1 to increase the Board of
Immigration Appeals (Board) from 15 to 17 members, with a request for
comments. 80 FR 31461 (June 3, 2015). As explained in the interim rule,
expanding the number of Board members is necessary to accomplish EOIR's
commitment to promptly provide Board appellate review of timely filed
immigration case appeals. The interim rule provided two primary reasons
for increasing the number of Board members from 15 to 17. First, EOIR
was managing the largest caseload the immigration court system had ever
seen. Second, the Department was in the process of hiring a substantial
number of additional immigration judges, which the Department expected
would increase the number of appeals filed with the Board.
The Department provided an opportunity for post-promulgation
comment even though this was a rule of internal agency organization and
therefore notice-and-comment rulemaking was not required. The
Department received two comments by the deadline of August 3, 2015. For
the reasons set forth below, the Department is finalizing the interim
rule amending 8 CFR part 1003, and adding four additional Board members
for a total of 21 Board members.
II. Background
EOIR administers the Nation's immigration court system. Generally,
cases commence before an immigration judge when the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) files with the immigration court a charging
document against an alien. See 8 CFR 1003.14(a). EOIR primarily decides
whether foreign nationals whom DHS charges with violating immigration
law pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act are removable as
charged and, if so, whether they should be ordered removed from the
United States, or should be granted protection or relief from removal
and be permitted to remain in the United States. EOIR's Office of the
Chief Immigration Judge administers the adjudications of the
immigration judges nationwide.
Decisions of the immigration judges are subject to review by EOIR's
appellate body, the Board, which is currently composed of 17 Board
members. The Board is the highest administrative tribunal for
interpreting and applying U.S. immigration law. The Board's decisions
can be reviewed by the Attorney General, as provided in 8 CFR 1003.1(g)
and (h). Decisions of the Board and the Attorney General are subject to
judicial review in the United States Courts of Appeals.
III. Expansion of Number of Board Members
EOIR's mission is to adjudicate immigration cases by fairly,
expeditiously, and uniformly interpreting and administering the
Nation's immigration laws. This task includes the initial adjudication
of aliens' cases in immigration courts nationwide, as well as appellate
review by the Board when appeals are timely filed. In order to more
efficiently accomplish the agency's commitment to promptly decide an
increasing volume of cases, as well as to review appeals in those
cases, this rule serves to finalize the interim rule, with the addition
of four additional Board members.\1\ This rule adopts a revision to the
third sentence of 8 CFR 1003.1(a)(1). The remainder of paragraph (a)(1)
is unchanged.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Department previously expanded the number of Board
members--from 11 to 15 members--on December 7, 2006, when it
published in the Federal Register an interim rule amending 8 CFR
1003.1. 71 FR 70855 (Dec. 7, 2006). On June 16, 2008, the Department
published a final rule adopting, without change, that interim rule.
73 FR 33875 (June 16, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Expanding the number of Board members was necessary when the
interim rule was published in 2015 because EOIR was experiencing an
increased caseload. Since the interim rule's publication, EOIR's
caseload has continued to grow; EOIR is currently managing the largest
caseload the immigration court system has ever seen. At the end of FY
2016, there were 518,545 total cases pending before the immigration
courts, marking an increase of 58,988 cases pending above those at the
end of FY 2015. See 2016 EOIR Statistics Yearbook W1.\2\ As of January
1, 2018, there were 667,292 total cases pending before the immigration
courts. This total increase included an increase in the number of
pending cases of detained aliens. EOIR's highest priority is the
efficient and timely adjudication of detained alien cases, and EOIR
requires additional resources to handle the increased caseload.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ EOIR's FY 2016 Statistics Yearbook, prepared by EOIR's
Office of Planning, Analysis, and Statistics, is available at
https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/fysb16/download.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department is taking steps to address the unprecedented pending
caseload. The Department hired 64 additional immigration judges in FY
2017 and continues to hire new immigration judges. The Department
expects that, as these additional immigration judges enter on duty, the
number of decisions rendered by the immigration judges nationwide will
[[Page 8322]]
increase, and the number of appeals filed with the Board will increase
as a result. The Department is also taking a number of management steps
to more efficiently address the pending caseload, which EOIR expects
will result in an increase in immigration judge decisions and, in turn,
an increase in the flow of appeals to the Board.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Statement of James McHenry, Acting Director, Executive
Office for Immigration Review, United States Department of Justice,
Before the Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security,
Committee on the Judiciary, United States House of Representatives,
November 1, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since January 2017, the Board has experienced a steady increase in
appeals. For example, the number of appeals increased throughout FY
2017, from 2,618 in October 2016 to 3,035 in September 2017. This
caseload is burdensome and, given current trends, may become
overwhelming were the Board to maintain 17 members.
The interim rule modified the number of Board members to 17, and
requested post-promulgation comment on the proposal to increase the
number of Board members in light of the increased caseload. Keeping in
mind the goal of maintaining cohesion and the ability to reach
consensus, but recognizing the challenges the Board faces in light of
its current and anticipated increased caseload, the Department has
determined that four additional members should be added to the Board.
The Department acknowledges the potential impact of the expansion to 21
members upon the Board's ability to provide coherent direction and to
issue precedential decisions, which require approval of a majority of
the Board, and will continue to consider means to improve the Board's
operations over time. But the interim rule's logic--balancing
efficiency with administrability--supports increasing the size of the
Board in the final rule to 21. These changes will help support an
efficient system of appellate adjudication in light of the increasing
caseload.
IV. Public Comments
The interim rule was exempt from the usual requirements of prior
notice and comment and a 30-day delay in effective date because, as an
internal delegation of authority, it is a rule of management or
personnel and relates to a matter of agency organization, procedure, or
practice. See 5 U.S.C. 553(a), (b), (d). Nonetheless, when promulgating
the interim rule, the Department provided an opportunity for post-
promulgation comment. The Department received two comments by the
deadline, only one of which was responsive to the rule. The commenter
stated that ``[e]xpanding the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) to 17
members from 15 members is . . . a necessary action as the pending
times for appeals has substantially increased as the docket of EOIR has
expanded.''
In response, the Department appreciates this expression of support.
EOIR has steadily hired new immigration judges, and continues to hire
new immigration judges, to adjudicate EOIR's historically large
caseload. As the number of immigration judges increases, so does the
number of decisions rendered by immigration judges. In turn, the number
of appeals filed with the Board also increases. Increasing the number
of Board members will assist EOIR in accomplishing its mission of
adjudicating appeals in a timely manner.
V. Regulatory Requirements
A. Administrative Procedure Act
As this rule is the finalization of an interim final rule, further
request for comment is not required. Alternately, comment is
unnecessary because this final rule is a rule of management or
personnel as well as a rule of agency organization, procedure, or
practice. See 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2), (b)(A). For the same reasons, this
rule is not subject to a 30-day delay in effective date. See 5 U.S.C.
553(a)(2), (d).
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), ``[w]henever an agency
is required by section 553 of [the Administrative Procedure Act], or
any other law, to publish general notice of proposed rulemaking for any
proposed rule . . . the agency shall prepare and make available for
public comment an initial regulatory flexibility analysis.'' 5 U.S.C.
603(a); see 5 U.S.C. 604(a). Such analysis is not required when a rule
is exempt from notice-and-comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553(b).
Because this is a rule of internal agency organization and therefore is
exempt from notice-and-comment rulemaking, no RFA analysis under 5
U.S.C. 603 or 604 is required for this rule.
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform 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 one 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.
D. Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), 13563
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), and 13771 (Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs)
This rule is limited to agency organization, management, or
personnel matters and is therefore not subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget pursuant to section 3(d)(3) of Executive Order
12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. Nevertheless, the Department
certifies that this regulation has been drafted in accordance with the
principles of Executive Order 12866, section 1(b), and Executive Order
13563. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits, including consideration of potential economic,
environmental, public health, and safety effects; distributive impacts;
and equity. The benefits of this rule include providing the Department
with an appropriate means of responding to the increased number of
appeals to the Board. The public will benefit from the expansion of the
number of Board members because such expansion will help EOIR better
accomplish its mission of adjudicating cases in an efficient and timely
manner. Overall, the benefits provided by the Board's expansion
outweigh the costs of employing additional federal employees. Finally,
because this rule is one of internal organization, management, or
personnel, it is not subject to the requirements of Executive Order
13771.
E. Executive Order 13132--Federalism
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.
F. Executive Order 12988--Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets the applicable standards set forth in sections 3(a)
and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988.
[[Page 8323]]
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
The provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law
104-13, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, and its implementing regulations, 5 CFR
part 1320, do not apply to this final rule because there are no new or
revised recordkeeping or reporting requirements.
H. Congressional Review Act
This is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This action
pertains to agency organization, management, and personnel and,
accordingly, is not a ``rule'' as that term is used in 5 U.S.C. 804(3).
Therefore, the reports to Congress and the Government Accountability
Office specified by 5 U.S.C. 801 are not required.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 1003
Administrative practice and procedure, Aliens, Immigration, Legal
services, Organization and functions (Government agencies).
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the preamble, the interim
rule amending 8 CFR part 1003, which was published at 80 FR 31461 on
June 3, 2015, is adopted as a final rule, with the following change:
PART 1003--EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW
0
1. The authority citation for part 1003 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 6 U.S.C. 521; 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103,
1154, 1155, 1158, 1182, 1226, 1229, 1229a, 1229b, 1229c, 1231,
1254a, 1255, 1324d, 1330, 1361, 1362; 28 U.S.C. 509, 510, 1746; sec.
2 Reorg. Plan No. 2 of 1950; 3 CFR, 1949-1953 Comp., p. 1002;
section 203 of Pub. L. 105-100, 111 Stat. 2196-200; sections 1506
and 1510 of Pub. L. 106-386, 114 Stat. 1527-29, 1531-32; section
1505 of Pub. L. 106-554, 114 Stat. 2763A-326 to -328.
0
2. Amend Sec. 1003.1 by revising the third sentence of paragraph
(a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 1003.1 Organization, jurisdiction, and powers of the Board of
Immigration Appeals.
(a)(1) * * * The Board shall consist of 21 members. * * *
* * * * *
Dated: February 20, 2018.
Jefferson B. Sessions III,
Attorney General.
[FR Doc. 2018-03980 Filed 2-26-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-30-P