Schedule of Fees for Consular Services-Elimination of the “Return Check Processing Fee”, 16636-16638 [2022-06131]
Download as PDF
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
16636
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 57 / Thursday, March 24, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
HI was five at the 95th percentile. See
79 FR 78328–32. The Commission’s
justification for the proposed rule was
based on available data showing that a
statistically stable, non-zero percentage
of the women studied had an HI greater
than one and that an HI less than or
equal to one is necessary ‘‘to ensure a
reasonable certainty of no harm to
children, pregnant women, or other
susceptible individuals with an
adequate margin of safety.’’ See 79 FR
78334–35.
After publication of the proposed
rule, the Commission examined new
data using the CHAP’s original
methodology. Based on the new data,
the Commission determined that
phthalate exposures had changed over
time and that there were too few
samples in the study with an HI above
one to make a statistically reliable
estimate for the population of the
number or percentage of women of
reproductive age with an HI greater than
one. No new data on infants were
available, so risk estimates for this
population did not change in the
updated analysis. Based on the new data
for women of reproductive age, the
Commission found that the risk of
antiandrogenic effects had decreased,
and that the HI at the 95th percentile
had decreased from five to less than
one. 82 FR 49958. Based on the new
data, the Commission could not
determine exactly what percentage of
the women studied had an HI greater
than one but did state that ‘‘between
two and nine real women from the
sample of 538 [women of reproductive
age] had an HI greater than one.’’ Id. The
Commission’s justification for the final
rule was based on the facts that between
two and nine individual samples had HI
levels greater than one and not the 10
percent of women who had exposures
described in the proposed rule, and that
no new data on infants were available.
For details regarding the respective
justifications, potential commenters are
directed to the preamble of the
respective Federal Register notices for
the proposed and final rule.
The court of appeals held that the
Commission did not provide adequate
notice and comment when it changed
the justification for the prohibitions in
the proposed rule to the final rule.
Accordingly, the Commission is
publishing this notice to request public
comment regarding the justification for
the final rule.
B. Request for Comment on Cost-Benefit
Analysis of Continuing Interim DINP
Prohibition
The Fifth Circuit held that the final
phthalates rule was deficient because it
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Mar 23, 2022
Jkt 256001
did not consider the costs and benefits
of continuing the interim prohibition on
DINP. Specifically, the court found that
the Commission was required at least to
consider the cost, as well as the effect
on utility and availability of products
containing DINP, to determine whether
to continue the interim prohibition.
The staff of the Directorate for
Economic Analysis has conducted a
cost-benefit analysis regarding
continuing the interim prohibition on
DINP in the final rule. The staff
memorandum ‘‘Cost-Benefit Analysis of
Continuing the Interim DINP
Prohibition in the Final Rule: 16 CFR
part 1307 ‘Prohibition of Children’s
Toys and Child Care Articles Containing
Specified Phthalates’ ’’ can be found
here. https://www.cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/
CostBenefitAnalysisDINPinPhthalates
FinalRule.pdf?VersionId=4dQErAhY2c
QdvQpf1I8rAqTNCjinie_h. The
Commission requests public comment
regarding the cost-benefit analysis of
continuing the interim prohibition on
DINP in the final rule.
III. Submission of Comments
We request comments on two issues:
The rationale for the final rule in section
II.A; and the cost-benefit analysis of
continuing the DINP interim prohibition
discussed in section II.B of this
document. Only comments submitted
regarding the rationale for the final rule
and/or the cost-benefit analysis of
continuing the DINP interim prohibition
will be considered. Comments
submitted on any other issues are out of
scope and will not be considered.
Finally, untimely submitted comments
will not be considered.
Information regarding the court
decision is available on the CPSC
website or https://www.regulations.gov,
under Docket No. CPSC–2014–0033,
Supporting and Related Materials.
Alternatively, interested parties may
obtain a copy of the court decision by
writing or calling the Division of the
Secretariat, Consumer Product Safety
Commission, 4330 East West Highway,
Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone (301)
504–6833.
Alberta E. Mills,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
[FR Doc. 2022–06223 Filed 3–23–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 22
[Public Notice: 11649]
RIN 1400–AF48
Schedule of Fees for Consular
Services—Elimination of the ‘‘Return
Check Processing Fee’’
Department of State.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of State (the
Department) is adjusting the Schedule
of Fees for Consular Services (Schedule)
by removing Item Number 74, a $25
return check processing fee.
Domestically, the Bureau of Consular
Affairs, Office of Passport Services (CA/
PPT), has charged customers this fee
when the instruments they have used to
submit payment for a passport
application could not be processed due
to insufficient funds, closed accounts,
stop payments, and altered/fictious
checks or money orders. A recent
review of the Department’s Cost of
Service Model (CoSM) established that
the costs associated with attempts to
recover on non-viable instruments are
now captured within the passport
application fee. The Department
therefore stopped charging this fee on
December 13, 2021, and will remove
this fee from the Schedule.
DATES: This rule is effective March 24,
2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Johanna Cruz, Management Analyst,
Office of the Comptroller, Bureau of
Consular Affairs, Department of State;
phone: 202–485–8915, email: fees@
state.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Background
This rule makes changes to the
Schedule of Fees in 22 CFR 22.1 by
removing Item Number 74, the $25
return check processing fee, from the
Schedule of Fees. This fee was added to
the Schedule in 1991 to recoup the cost
of time spent by passport office
personnel attempting to recover on bad
checks applicants had submitted to the
Department. According to the Passport
Directorate’s research, in FY 1989 there
were approximately 8,800 bad checks
and money orders, which required an
estimated 5,400 staff hours to process.
This fee has only been charged
domestically; overseas posts do not
accept personal checks and have not
charged the fee. A recent review of the
Department’s CoSM established that the
costs associated with the return check
processing fee are now captured within
E:\FR\FM\24MRR1.SGM
24MRR1
16637
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 57 / Thursday, March 24, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
a portion of the passport application fee
the Department already charges.
What is the authority for this action?
The Department of State’s general
authority to set and charge fees for
consular services it provides derives
from the user charges statute, 31 U.S.C.
9701. See, e.g., 31 U.S.C. 9701(b)(2)(A)
(‘‘The head of each agency . . . may
prescribe regulations establishing the
charge for a service or thing of value
provided by the agency . . . based on
. . . the costs to the government.’’).
Various statutes permit the Department
of State to retain some of the fee revenue
it collects (e.g., passport security
surcharge, immigrant visa security
surcharge, affidavit of support, etc.), but
the Department of State lacks statutory
authority to retain the return check
processing fee. As with many other
consular fees, all collections of this fee
must be deposited into the general fund
of the Treasury pursuant to the
Miscellaneous Receipts Statute, 31
U.S.C. 3302(b). The Department
likewise does not retain the passport
application fee. See 22 U.S.C. 214(a)
(‘‘There shall be collected and paid into
the Treasury of the United States a fee,
prescribed by the Secretary of State by
regulation, for the filing of each
application for a passport . . . .’’).
Activity-Based Costing
To set fees in accordance with the
general user charges principles set forth
in 31 U.S.C. 9701, the Department must
calculate the true cost to the U.S.
government of providing each consular
service. Following guidance provided in
‘‘Managerial Cost Accounting Concepts
and Standards for the Federal
Government,’’ OMB’s Statement #4 of
Federal Accounting Standards (SFFAS
#4), available at https://www.fasab.gov/
pdffiles/sffas-4.pdf, the Department
chose to develop its CoSM using an
Activity-Based Costing (ABC)
methodology to determine the true cost
of each consular service.
The Government Accountability
Office (GAO) defines ABC as a ‘‘set of
accounting methods used to identify
and describe costs and required
resources for activities within
processes.’’ Organizations can use the
same staff and resources (computer
equipment, production facilities, etc.) to
produce multiple products or services;
therefore, ABC models seek to identify
and assign costs to processes and
activities and then to individual
products and services through the
identification of key cost drivers
referred to as ‘‘resource drivers’’ and
‘‘activity drivers.’’ The goal is to
proportionally and accurately distribute
costs. ABC models require financial and
accounting analysis and modeling skills
combined with a detailed understanding
of an organization’s business processes.
SFFAS Statement #4 provides a detailed
discussion of the use of cost accounting
by the U.S. Government.
The ABC approach focuses on the
activities required to produce a
particular service or product and uses
resource drivers to assign costs through
activities and activity drivers to assign
costs from activities to services. In the
context of the work of the Department’s
Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA),
resource drivers assign costs (resources
including materials, supplies, and labor
utilized in the production or delivery of
services and products) to activities
using business rules that reflect the
operational reality of CA and the data
available from consular systems,
surveys, and internal records. Most
resource drivers are based on time spent
on each activity. Activity drivers assign
the cost of consular activities to the
services CA provides. Most activity
drivers are based on volumes.
Why is the department removing this
fee?
Based on feedback from CA/PPT’s
field offices, the Department evaluated
whether there was a need to charge the
$25 return check processing fee. Upon
review, it was determined that the costs
associated with this service are now
captured in the CoSM’s cashiering
activity, which is accounted for in the
passport application fee the Department
already charges. The Department
therefore no longer needs to charge the
return check processing fee in order to
recover the costs of providing this
service.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
As removal of this fee constitutes a
benefit, this rule is published as a final
rule under the authority of 5 U.S.C.
553(a)(2). Since the rule is exempt from
§ 553, this rule is effective upon
publication.
Regulatory Flexibility 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).
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.
Congressional Review Act
This rule is a not major rule as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Executive Order 12866
The Department has reviewed this
rule to ensure its consistency with the
regulatory philosophy and principles set
forth in the Executive Order and affirms
that this regulation is consistent with
the guidance therein. The Office of
Management and Budget has designated
this rule not significant for purposes of
E.O. 12866.
Details of the changes to the Schedule
of Fee are as follows:
TABLE 1—CHANGES TO THE SCHEDULE OF FEES
Proposed
fee
Item No.
Current fee
Change in
fee
Percentage
increase
Projected
annual
number of
applications 1
Estimated
change in
annual fees
collected 2
Change
in state
retained
fees
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR CONSULAR SERVICES
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
*
*
*
*
PPT
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Mar 23, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\24MRR1.SGM
24MRR1
Change
in remittance
to Treasury
16638
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 57 / Thursday, March 24, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1—CHANGES TO THE SCHEDULE OF FEES—Continued
Item No.
Proposed
fee
*
*
74. Return Check Processing Fee ...................
$0
Current fee
Change in
fee
Percentage
increase
$25
*
($25)
(100%)
*
Projected
annual
number of
applications 1
Estimated
change in
annual fees
collected 2
Change
in state
retained
fees
Change
in remittance
to Treasury
8,293
*
($207,325)
*
$0
($207,325)
*
1 Based
on estimated FY 2021 workload calculated with 8/1/2021 actual demand.
2 Using FY 2021 workload to generate collections. This will be a reduction in total annual remittance to Treasury.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132
This regulation 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 regulation.
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 Executive Order 13175
do not apply to this rulemaking.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose any new
reporting or record-keeping
requirements subject to the Paperwork
Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 22
Consular services, Fees.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in
the preamble, 22 CFR part 22 is
amended as follows:
PART 22—SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR
CONSULAR SERVICES—
DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND
FOREIGN SERVICE
1. The authority citation for part 22
continues to read as follows:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
■
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101 note, 1153 note,
1157 note, 1183a note, 1184(c)(12), 1201(c),
1351, 1351 note, 1713, 1714, 1714 note; 10
U.S.C. 2602(c); 22 U.S.C. 214, 214 note,
1475e, 2504(h), 2651a, 4206, 4215, 4219,
6551; 31 U.S.C. 9701; Exec. Order 10718, 22
FR 4632 (1957); Exec. Order 11295, 31 FR
10603 (1966).
■
2. Amend § 22.1 by
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Mar 23, 2022
Jkt 256001
a. Revising the introductory text; and
b. In the table, removing and reserving
entry 74.
The revision reads as follows:
■
■
§ 22.1
Schedule of Fees
The following table sets forth the fees
for the following categories listed on the
U.S. Department of State’s Schedule of
Fees for Consular Services:
*
*
*
*
*
Rena Bitter,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs,
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2022–06131 Filed 3–23–22; 8:45 am]
To view documents
mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://
www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2021–
0750 in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click
‘‘SEARCH.’’ Next, in the Document
Type column, select ‘‘Supporting &
Related Material.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call or
email Mr. Ron Houck, Sector MarylandNCR, Waterways Management Division,
U.S. Coast Guard: telephone 410–576–
2674, email Ronald.L.Houck@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
BILLING CODE 4710–06–P
I. Table of Abbreviations
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG–2021–0750]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Chesapeake Bay,
Craighill Channel, MD
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard is extending
the duration of a temporary safety zone
on certain navigable waters of the
Chesapeake Bay. This action is
necessary to provide for the safety of
persons and the marine environment
from the potential safety hazards
associated with the damage assessment
and salvage of the grounded freight ship
EVER FORWARD, through 9 p.m. on
April 13, 2022. This rule prohibits
persons and vessels from being in the
safety zone unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port, Maryland-National
Capital Region or a designated
representative.
SUMMARY:
This rule is effective without
actual notice from March 24, 2022 until
9 p.m. on April 13, 2022. For the
purposes of enforcement, actual notice
will be used from 9 p.m. on March 20,
2022, until March 24, 2022.
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
II. Background Information and
Regulatory History
On March 14, 2022, the Coast Guard
issued a final rule establishing a
temporary safety zone on certain
navigable waters of the Chesapeake Bay
to protect persons and vessels during
damage assessment and salvage
operations at the grounded 1,102-foot
Hong Kong-flagged motor vessel EVER
FORWARD. The orignal rule runs
through 9 p.m. on March 20, 2022.
However, additional time is needed to
conduct the damage assessment and
salvage operations and, as a result, the
Coast Guard needs to extend the safety
zone through 9 p.m. on April 13, 2022.
The Coast Guard is issuing this
temporary rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment pursuant to
authority under section 4(a) of the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5
U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision
authorizes an agency to issue a rule
without prior notice and opportunity to
comment when the agency for good
cause finds that those procedures are
‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for not publishing a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this extension because it
E:\FR\FM\24MRR1.SGM
24MRR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 57 (Thursday, March 24, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16636-16638]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06131]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 22
[Public Notice: 11649]
RIN 1400-AF48
Schedule of Fees for Consular Services--Elimination of the
``Return Check Processing Fee''
AGENCY: Department of State.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of State (the Department) is adjusting the
Schedule of Fees for Consular Services (Schedule) by removing Item
Number 74, a $25 return check processing fee. Domestically, the Bureau
of Consular Affairs, Office of Passport Services (CA/PPT), has charged
customers this fee when the instruments they have used to submit
payment for a passport application could not be processed due to
insufficient funds, closed accounts, stop payments, and altered/
fictious checks or money orders. A recent review of the Department's
Cost of Service Model (CoSM) established that the costs associated with
attempts to recover on non-viable instruments are now captured within
the passport application fee. The Department therefore stopped charging
this fee on December 13, 2021, and will remove this fee from the
Schedule.
DATES: This rule is effective March 24, 2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Johanna Cruz, Management Analyst,
Office of the Comptroller, Bureau of Consular Affairs, Department of
State; phone: 202-485-8915, email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This rule makes changes to the Schedule of Fees in 22 CFR 22.1 by
removing Item Number 74, the $25 return check processing fee, from the
Schedule of Fees. This fee was added to the Schedule in 1991 to recoup
the cost of time spent by passport office personnel attempting to
recover on bad checks applicants had submitted to the Department.
According to the Passport Directorate's research, in FY 1989 there were
approximately 8,800 bad checks and money orders, which required an
estimated 5,400 staff hours to process. This fee has only been charged
domestically; overseas posts do not accept personal checks and have not
charged the fee. A recent review of the Department's CoSM established
that the costs associated with the return check processing fee are now
captured within
[[Page 16637]]
a portion of the passport application fee the Department already
charges.
What is the authority for this action?
The Department of State's general authority to set and charge fees
for consular services it provides derives from the user charges
statute, 31 U.S.C. 9701. See, e.g., 31 U.S.C. 9701(b)(2)(A) (``The head
of each agency . . . may prescribe regulations establishing the charge
for a service or thing of value provided by the agency . . . based on .
. . the costs to the government.''). Various statutes permit the
Department of State to retain some of the fee revenue it collects
(e.g., passport security surcharge, immigrant visa security surcharge,
affidavit of support, etc.), but the Department of State lacks
statutory authority to retain the return check processing fee. As with
many other consular fees, all collections of this fee must be deposited
into the general fund of the Treasury pursuant to the Miscellaneous
Receipts Statute, 31 U.S.C. 3302(b). The Department likewise does not
retain the passport application fee. See 22 U.S.C. 214(a) (``There
shall be collected and paid into the Treasury of the United States a
fee, prescribed by the Secretary of State by regulation, for the filing
of each application for a passport . . . .'').
Activity-Based Costing
To set fees in accordance with the general user charges principles
set forth in 31 U.S.C. 9701, the Department must calculate the true
cost to the U.S. government of providing each consular service.
Following guidance provided in ``Managerial Cost Accounting Concepts
and Standards for the Federal Government,'' OMB's Statement #4 of
Federal Accounting Standards (SFFAS #4), available at https://www.fasab.gov/pdffiles/sffas-4.pdf, the Department chose to develop its
CoSM using an Activity-Based Costing (ABC) methodology to determine the
true cost of each consular service.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) defines ABC as a ``set
of accounting methods used to identify and describe costs and required
resources for activities within processes.'' Organizations can use the
same staff and resources (computer equipment, production facilities,
etc.) to produce multiple products or services; therefore, ABC models
seek to identify and assign costs to processes and activities and then
to individual products and services through the identification of key
cost drivers referred to as ``resource drivers'' and ``activity
drivers.'' The goal is to proportionally and accurately distribute
costs. ABC models require financial and accounting analysis and
modeling skills combined with a detailed understanding of an
organization's business processes. SFFAS Statement #4 provides a
detailed discussion of the use of cost accounting by the U.S.
Government.
The ABC approach focuses on the activities required to produce a
particular service or product and uses resource drivers to assign costs
through activities and activity drivers to assign costs from activities
to services. In the context of the work of the Department's Bureau of
Consular Affairs (CA), resource drivers assign costs (resources
including materials, supplies, and labor utilized in the production or
delivery of services and products) to activities using business rules
that reflect the operational reality of CA and the data available from
consular systems, surveys, and internal records. Most resource drivers
are based on time spent on each activity. Activity drivers assign the
cost of consular activities to the services CA provides. Most activity
drivers are based on volumes.
Why is the department removing this fee?
Based on feedback from CA/PPT's field offices, the Department
evaluated whether there was a need to charge the $25 return check
processing fee. Upon review, it was determined that the costs
associated with this service are now captured in the CoSM's cashiering
activity, which is accounted for in the passport application fee the
Department already charges. The Department therefore no longer needs to
charge the return check processing fee in order to recover the costs of
providing this service.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
As removal of this fee constitutes a benefit, this rule is
published as a final rule under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2).
Since the rule is exempt from Sec. 553, this rule is effective upon
publication.
Regulatory Flexibility 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).
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.
Congressional Review Act
This rule is a not major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Executive Order 12866
The Department has reviewed this rule to ensure its consistency
with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in the
Executive Order and affirms that this regulation is consistent with the
guidance therein. The Office of Management and Budget has designated
this rule not significant for purposes of E.O. 12866.
Details of the changes to the Schedule of Fee are as follows:
Table 1--Changes to the Schedule of Fees
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Projected Estimated
annual number change in Change in Change in
Item No. Proposed fee Current fee Change in Percentage of annual fees state remittance
fee increase applications collected retained to Treasury
\1\ \2\ fees
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR CONSULAR SERVICES
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
PPT
[[Page 16638]]
* * * * * * *
74. Return Check Processing Fee....... $0 $25 ($25) (100%) 8,293 ($207,325) $0 ($207,325)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Based on estimated FY 2021 workload calculated with 8/1/2021 actual demand.
\2\ Using FY 2021 workload to generate collections. This will be a reduction in total annual remittance to Treasury.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132
This regulation 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 regulation.
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 Executive Order 13175 do not apply to
this rulemaking.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose any new reporting or record-keeping
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 22
Consular services, Fees.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the preamble, 22 CFR part 22
is amended as follows:
PART 22--SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR CONSULAR SERVICES--DEPARTMENT OF
STATE AND FOREIGN SERVICE
0
1. The authority citation for part 22 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101 note, 1153 note, 1157 note, 1183a note,
1184(c)(12), 1201(c), 1351, 1351 note, 1713, 1714, 1714 note; 10
U.S.C. 2602(c); 22 U.S.C. 214, 214 note, 1475e, 2504(h), 2651a,
4206, 4215, 4219, 6551; 31 U.S.C. 9701; Exec. Order 10718, 22 FR
4632 (1957); Exec. Order 11295, 31 FR 10603 (1966).
0
2. Amend Sec. 22.1 by
0
a. Revising the introductory text; and
0
b. In the table, removing and reserving entry 74.
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 22.1 Schedule of Fees
The following table sets forth the fees for the following
categories listed on the U.S. Department of State's Schedule of Fees
for Consular Services:
* * * * *
Rena Bitter,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2022-06131 Filed 3-23-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P