Namecheck for non-immigrants too!

[sunny1000]

Looks like the namecheck nightmare will extend to non-immigrants too starting this new year as per this below link:
---------
http://www.immigration-law.com

12/31/2007: State Department to Charge Fingerprint/Namecheck Fee for All "Nonimmigrant" & "Immigrant Visa Applicant" Effective 01/01/2008

* The State Department has begun performing fingerprint and name checks on all visa applicants except those falling within a narrow range of exceptions. Fingerprints are now required of all visa applicants except those under 14 years of age or over 79 years of age, and certain diplomats and officials. The Department will charge the fingerprint and namecheck fees to all the immigrant visa and nonimmigrant visa applications under the revised the consular visa fee amendment rule that goes effect tomorrow on January 1, 2008, unless the such fingerprint and name checks are waiver. For the announcement, please click here.
-------------
[Federal Register: December 31, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 249)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 74174-74175]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr31de07-6]


[[Page 74174]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

22 CFR Part 41

[Public Notice 6045]


Visas: Documentation of Non-immigrants Under the Immigration and
Nationality Act

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This rule amends 22 CFR Part 41 in order to reflect increased
security measures requiring fingerprinting and name checks of all visa
applicants, with certain narrow exceptions, and to be consistent with
an amendment to the Schedule of Fees for Consular Services including
the cost of such checks in fees for non-immigrant and immigrant visas
and border crossing cards.

DATES: This final rule becomes effective January 1, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara J. Kennedy, Legislation and
Regulations Division, Visa Services, Department of State; 2401 E
Street, NW., Room L-603, Washington, DC 20520-0106, (202) 663-1206, e-
mail KennedyBJ@State.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

What Is the Authority for This Action?

The Secretary of State is charged with the administration and
enforcement of the provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act
(INA) and all other immigration and nationality laws relating to, inter
alia, the powers, duties and functions of consular officers. 8 U.S.C.
1104. The Secretary is also authorized to establish regulations
necessary for carrying out these duties. Id. In 2004, Congress found
that existing procedures allowed many individuals to enter the United
States showing only minimal identification and that greater security
measures were necessary to protect the United States from terrorist
attacks. Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004
(IRTPA), Pub. L. 108-458 (Dec. 17, 2004), section 7209. In order to
more effectively carry out its duties to administer and enforce the
INA, and to respond to the congressional mandate in the IRTPA to
increase the nation's border security, the Department has begun
performing fingerprint and name checks on all visa applicants except
those falling within a narrow range of exceptions. Fingerprints are now
required of all visa applicants except those under 14 years of age or
over 79 years of age, and certain diplomats and officials. The
expansion of fingerprint and name checks to include the vast majority
of visa applicants is a critical component of the Department's efforts
to enhance the nation's border security.

Why is the Department Amending Part 41 at This Time?

The deletion of Part 22, section 41.105(b) is necessary at this
time because the Department is conducting fingerprint checks and name
checks on all visa applicants who do not fall within the exceptions
noted above, and because beginning on January 1, 2008, the cost of such
checks will be included in visa fees, including the fees for non-
immigrant visas. In contrast, section 41.105(b) prescribes fingerprint
and name checks of non-immigrant visa applicants only in certain
circumstances, and provides that a fee for fingerprint checks will only
be charged when a name check indicates the possibility of a criminal
history. 22 CFR 41.105(b) should be deleted in order to ensure that the
Department's regulations concerning fingerprint and name checks of non-
immigrant visa applicants are consistent. In order to prevent any
confusion as to when fingerprint and name checks are required of non-
immigrant visa applicants and what fees for these services must be paid
by visa applicants, the provision must be deleted effective January 1,
2008, simultaneously with the effective date of the amendment to the
Schedule of Fees for Consular Services.

Regulatory Findings

Administrative Procedure Act

This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United
States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is not
subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 533.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272:

Small Business.

Because this final rule is exempt from notice and comment
rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the regulatory
flexibility analysis requirements set forth at sections 603 and 604 of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless,
consistent with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA),
Pub. L. 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies
to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an
annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal
governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any
such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small
governments.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for
purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Pub. L. 104-121.
This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse
effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity,
innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete
with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.

Executive Order 12866

The Department of State does not consider this rule to be a
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866, section
3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. In addition, this rule is exempt
from review under E.O. 12866. The Department has nevertheless reviewed
it to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and
principles set forth in that Executive Order.

Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism

This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism
implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372
and No. 13132.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not impose information collection requirements under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.

List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41

Visas, Nonimmigrants, Passports and Visas, Fees, Surcharge.


[[Page 74175]]



0
Accordingly, 22 CFR part 41 is amended as follows:

PART 41--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for Part 41 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681-795
through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C. 1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-
458).

0
2. Section 41.105 is amended by removing paragraph (b).

Dated: December 21, 2007.
Maura Harty,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E7-25417 Filed 12-28-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
------------------

[pappu]

So are we looking at extra-long namecheck delays?

[guesswho]

I thought taking fingerprints for all visa applicants (with those age exception) is already in place. Looks like this new rule is only increasing the visa fees. Other procedures like whether to do a namecheck or not for a non-immigrant visa applicant is still the same. Is that right?

[Canadian_Dream]

The name check has been the part of DOS Non-Immigrant Visa issuance procedure for quite sometime now. This is not same as FBI name check but a faster IBIS kinda check that takes less than 24 hours to complete in most cases. I know this because when I requested same day visa due to my travel plan, a very polite consular officer told me that it is not possible becasue they have to run a namecheck that would not complete before the following morning. They do it at the end of business day before actual visas are printed and only after that passports are ready to be picked up.

[prioritydate]

deleted!

Never mind, it is totally a different process.

[axbasit]

FBI namecheck is also a part for certain visa applicants, specially if you belong from those designated 30 countries, several H1-b visa applications have been delayed significantly just because of the fact the name check is not complete, the INS officer will tell you that 'administrative review' is not complete, and you should wait.

some people had to wait even 6-9 months before they could get visa stamp, and for that period, they had to either take leave on absence or work from remote location(outside US ofcourse) or loose job, while they wait for visa stamp and not work, the time still counts against H1-B 6 year time.

The value of the FBI name checks needs to be evaluated, the process has just became an excuse to bring misery, frustration ,depression and financial loss to a lot of non-immigrant and immigrant applicants, the process details needs to be de-classified so the transparency and efficiency of the process could be evaluated.

[sunny1000]

What happened to the bill that was supposed to be passed a few months back to clear namechecks within 6 months. I know the house passed it and the senate attached it as an amendment. Did it go to the President's desk at all? Anyone has any updates on this?

Thanks and Happy New Year to all IVans and their families!!

[sunny1000]

Originally Posted by guesswho

I thought taking fingerprints for all visa applicants (with those age exception) is already in place. Looks like this new rule is only increasing the visa fees. Other procedures like whether to do a namecheck or not for a non-immigrant visa applicant is still the same. Is that right?

The fingerprints that they are talking about now is the 10 finger scan (just like the FP for GC).

[lazycis]

Originally Posted by sunny1000

What happened to the bill that was supposed to be passed a few months back to clear namechecks within 6 months. I know the house passed it and the senate attached it as an amendment. Did it go to the President's desk at all? Anyone has any updates on this?

Thanks and Happy New Year to all IVans and their families!!

As far as I know, the only thing that got signed into law is the requirement to provide reports to Congress regarding pending name checks.

[pappu]

Originally Posted by lazycis

As far as I know, the only thing that got signed into law is the requirement to provide reports to Congress regarding pending name checks.

Not sure about this but this provision has no significance.
The immigration subcommittee members can do this anyways and can also schedule a hearing.

The important part is solving the issue, making the agencies efficient and accountable for not clearing name checks on time, not processing on time, and not wasting visas every year.

[lazycis]

Originally Posted by pappu

Not sure about this but this provision has no significance.
The immigration subcommittee members can do this anyways and can also schedule a hearing.

The important part is solving the issue, making the agencies efficient and accountable for not clearing name checks on time, not processing on time, and not wasting visas every year.

Forget about it, even the reporting provision was stripped out from the final version of consolidated appropriations act, 2008 signed by the President.

[Green_Always]

is this for Business / Visitor visa's ? Pls let me know.

If yes.. then it will take ages to get Business / Visitor visa's for parents / friends to come here. ?