99-20783. Reinstatement of Exchange Visitors Who Fail To Maintain Valid Program Status  

  • [Federal Register Volume 64, Number 156 (Friday, August 13, 1999)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 44123-44128]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 99-20783]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY
    
    22 CFR Part 514
    
    
    Reinstatement of Exchange Visitors Who Fail To Maintain Valid 
    Program Status
    
    AGENCY: United States Information Agency.
    
    ACTION: Interim Final Rule with request for comments.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: This is an Interim Final Rule with request for comments being 
    made by the United States Information Agency (hereinafter ``the 
    Agency''). The rule will amend the Agency's Exchange Visitor Program 
    regulations regarding reinstatement of J-1 exchange visitors to valid 
    program status. This Interim Final Rule supersedes the Agency's 
    Statement of Policy which was published in the Federal Register on 
    April 24, 1997.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: This Interim Final Rule is effective on August 13, 
    1999. Comments regarding this rulemaking will be accepted until 
    September 13, 1999.
    
    ADDRESSES: United States Information Agency, Office of the General 
    Counsel, 301 Fourth Street, SW, Room 700, Washington, DC 20547-0001.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lorie J. Nierenberg, Office of the 
    General Counsel, United States Informaiton Agency, 301 Fourth Street, 
    SW, Washington, DC 20547; telephone (202) 619-6084.
    
    
    [[Page 44124]]
    
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: While it is not the responsibility of the 
    sponor to ensure that the exchange visitor timely departs the U.S., the 
    Exchange Visitor Program regulations do require that a sponsor monitor 
    its participating exchange visitors [22 CFR 514.10(e)]. Among other 
    things, the sponsor must ensure that the activity in which the exchange 
    visitor is engaged is consistent with the category and activity listed 
    on the exchange visitor's Form IAP-66 [22 CFR 514.10(e)(1)]. The 
    sponsor must also monitor the progress and welfare of the exchange 
    visitor to the extent appropriate for the category [22 CFR 
    514.10(e)(2)]. Finally, the sponsor must require the exchange visitor 
    to keep the sponsor apprised of his or her address and telephone 
    number, and maintain such information [22 CFR 514.10(e)(3)].
        The Agency believes that the monitoring requirements set forth in 
    the existing Exchange Visitor Program regulations illuminate the 
    sponsor's general obligation to monitor the exchange visitor's Form 
    IAP-66 to ensure that such form accurately reflects the activities and 
    the program dates of the exchange visitor and that the exchange visitor 
    is advised of the limitations on his or her activities and authorized 
    stay in the United States (Existing regulations also explicitly require 
    the sponsor to notify the Agency in writing when the exchange visitor 
    has withdrawn from or completed a program thirty or more days prior to 
    the ending date on his or her Form IAP-66 or when the exchange visitor 
    has been terminated from his or her program [22 CFR 514.13(c)].)
        One of the purposes of the Fulbright-Hays Act is to increase mutual 
    understanding between the people of the United States and the people of 
    other countries by means of educational and cultural exchanges. When 
    Congress enacted that Act, it amended the Immigration and Nationality 
    Act by adding a new nonimmigrant visa category--the J visa--to be used 
    solely for educational and cultural exchanges. Exchange visitors who 
    come to the United States on the J visa come here as participants in 
    exchange programs designated by the Director of the Agency. While the 
    Agency has a programmatic role with respect to designating and 
    monitoring programs in which exchange visitors will participate while 
    in the United States on the J visa, it does not administer or enforce 
    the provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended. 
    Administration and enforcement of that Act is solely under the 
    jurisdiction of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (``the 
    Service''). Oversight of the exchange visitor's program status is 
    administered by the Agency, but the terms and conditions of the 
    exchange visitor's nonimmigrant status are administered by the Service. 
    Thus, responsible officers and exchange visitors must be aware that 
    failure to maintain valid J-1 program status may at the same time be a 
    failure to maintain valid immigration status, which may result in 
    serious adverse consequences for an exchange visitor by operation of 
    immigration law. Where there has been a failure to maintain valid 
    immigration status, the Agency's reinstatement to valid program status 
    does not serve as a reinstatement to valid immigration status.
        Similarly, there may be instances where an exchange visitor may 
    fail to maintain both valid nonimmigrant status and valid program 
    status. For example, the Agency has been advised that a soon to be 
    promulgated Service regulation will establish that a J-1 exchange 
    visitor will be deemed to have failed to maintain valid nonimmigrant 
    status and valid J-1 program status if the exchange visitor fails to 
    pay the fee mandated by Public Law 104-208 (the ``CIPRIS'' fee). At the 
    same time, failure to pay the fee would preclude reinstatement to valid 
    J-1 program status under this interim final rule; i.e., reinstatement 
    to valid program status could not be made until the fee is paid.
        The Agency acknowledges that most program participants do not 
    knowingly or wilfully engage in practices that would jeopardize their 
    status in the United States. However, the Agency is aware that on 
    occasion, whether through circumstances beyond the control of the 
    exchange visitor or through administrative oversight, inadvertence, or 
    neglect on the part of a Responsible Officer or an exchange visitor, or 
    both, the exchange visitor may fail to maintain valid program status.
        The Agency believes that the above principles apply to the subject 
    of this rulemaking: Reinstatement to valid program status. Valid 
    program status, in turn, relates directly to the concept of ``duration 
    of participation in an exchange visitor program.'' With one exception, 
    the Exchange Visitor Program regulations establish a duration of 
    participation for each specific program category. [Exchange visitors in 
    the ``college and university student'' category have no fixed duration 
    of participation as long as they meet certain requirements. See 22 CFR 
    514.23(h)]. Those limits to duration of participation were not set 
    forth in the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961 (the 
    Fulbright-Hays Act) that established the Exchange Visitor Program and 
    created the J visa as part of the Immigration and Naturalization Act. 
    Nevertheless, the vision of the authors of that legislation was that 
    scholars, professors, trainees, and the other caregories of exchange 
    visitors mentioned in the Act would come to the United States, 
    accomplish the objective for which they came, and then return to their 
    home country to share their new knowledge and skills with their 
    countrymen. That vision would be frustrated and undermined if there 
    were no finite limit on the period of time in which exchange visitors 
    could remain in the United States. Moreover, the Agency believes that 
    greatly extended periods of stay here tend to cause a closer 
    identification with the United States and tend to work against the 
    exchange visitor's eventual return home and completion of the desired 
    ``exchange.''
        Thus, the Exchange Visitor Program regulations impose limits on the 
    duration of participation that vary from category to category in 
    recognition of the fact that some categories require longer stays than 
    others. (In some cases, the language in the sponsor's designation 
    letter provides for less than the maximum duration of stay for program 
    participation for that particular category.) When the Agency fails to 
    require strict adherence to the established durations of participation, 
    for example, by tolerating or enabling the exchange visitor to fail to 
    maintain valid program status or otherwise remain in the United States 
    beyond the expiration of thirty days after the end date of the exchange 
    visitor's Form IAP-66, the Agency believes that it is departing from 
    the intent of the Fulbright-Hays Act and the immigration laws of the 
    United States. Moreover, remaining in the United States more than 
    thirty days beyond the end date on the exchange visitor's Form IAP-66 
    will pace the exchange visitor in jeopardy of violating laws and 
    regulations enforced by the Service.
        The Agency recognizes that some exchange visitors commit minor or 
    technical infractions of the Exchange Visitor Program regulations 
    through sheer inadvertence or excusable neglect. The Agency is of the 
    view that these minor or technical regulations do not constitute a 
    failure to maintain valid J-1 program status. Under this Interim Final 
    Rule, such minor or technical infractions may be corrected by the 
    responsible Officer and an application for reinstatement need not be 
    submitted to the Agency. The Responsible Officer's correction of a 
    minor or technical infraction returns the exchange visitor
    
    [[Page 44125]]
    
    to the status quo ante, i.e., it is as if the minor or technical 
    infraction never occurred.
        The Interim Final Rule provides examples of minor or technical 
    infractions. Nevertheless, it is impossible to foresee and list all 
    possible such infractions. Thus, the Interim Final Rule establishes 
    several criteria to guide the Responsible Officer in determining 
    whether the infraction is a minor or technical one. If there is any 
    question in the mind of the Responsible Officer as to whether the 
    infraction is a minor or a substantive one, the Interim Final Rule 
    requires that the Responsible Officer apply to the Agency for 
    reinstatement on behalf of the exchange visitor.
        The Exchange Visitor Program regulations, which appear at 22 CFR 
    Part 514, do not include a regulation or reinstatement to valid program 
    status. On April 24, 1997, the Agency published a Statement of Policy 
    on reinstatement which was to be followed until a formal rulemaking was 
    promulgated. 62 FR 19925. The Interim Rule supersedes and replaces the 
    April 24, 1997 Statement of Policy. The Interim Rule establishes two 
    categories with respect to reinstatement for failure to maintain valid 
    program status: (1) those cases wherein a substantive violation of the 
    regulations has occurred and which require application to the Agency 
    for reinstatement; and, (2) those cases in which reinstatement will not 
    be granted under any circumstances. For those cases identified in item 
    1 above, exchange visitors must provide evidence that they have at all 
    times continued, or maintained an intent to continue, their program 
    objective.
        (1) Substantive violations or infractions of the regulations. The 
    Interim Final Rule lists two violations which the Agency considers to 
    be substantive violations or infractions of the regulations. If the 
    Responsible Officer determines that the violation does not fit within 
    one of the two listed violations, then the violation is either a 
    technical violation which can be addressed by the Responsible Officer 
    on his or her own initiative, or it is one of the violations for which 
    reinstatement cannot be obtained.
        While this Interim Rule on reinstatement for substantive violations 
    fairly tracks the April 24, 1997 Statement of Policy, two additional 
    exceptions follow. The Interim Final Rule requires the Responsible 
    Officer, on behalf of the exchange visitor, to carry the burden of 
    persuasion by demonstrating that the exchange visitor failed to 
    maintain valid program status for less than 120 calendar days beyond 
    the end date on the Form IAP-66, was pursuing or maintained an intent 
    to pursue his or her original program objective, and (1) that the 
    violation of status resulted from circumstances beyond the control of 
    the exchange visitor or from administrative oversight, inadvertence, or 
    neglect on the part of the Responsible Officer or the exchange visitor 
    or (2) that the failure to receive reinstatement to valid program 
    status would result in an unusual hardship to the exchange visitor. The 
    Agency considers an unusual hardship to be a hardship that would not 
    normally be expected to result from a failure to obtain reinstatement. 
    For example, if an exchange visitor fails to maintain valid program 
    status and, if denied reinstatement, must pay for a return airline 
    ticket to his or her home country, the level of hardship would not be 
    considered unusual. By contrast, if an exchange visitor doctoral 
    candidate is in the final semester of a seven-year degree program and 
    fails to maintain valid program status, the Agency would consider it an 
    unusual hardship to be denied the opportunity to complete the final 
    semester and obtain the doctoral degree. (This rulemaking changes the 
    April 25, 1997 Statement of Policy. The latter required that in all 
    cases both tests be met and, in addition, required a showing of 
    unwarranted hardship, as opposed to unusual hardship.)
        In addition, if the failure to maintain valid program status was 
    equal to or more than 120 calendar days duration, then the Responsible 
    Officer, on behalf of the exchange visitor, must demonstrate to the 
    Agency that both tests are met, i.e., (1) that the violation of status 
    resulted from circumstances beyond the control of the exchange visitor 
    or from administrative delay or oversight, inadvertence, or neglect on 
    the part of the Responsible Officer or the exchange visitor, and (2) 
    that the failure to receive reinstatement to program status would 
    result in unusual hardship to the exchange visitor.
        Pursuant to this Interim Final Rule, where there has been a 
    substantive violation or infraction of the regulations, the agency will 
    consider reinstating to valid program status a J-1 exchange visitor who 
    makes a request for reinstatement through his or her Responsible 
    Officer. In such cases, the Responsible Officer is to direct a letter 
    to the Exchange Visitor Program Services office containing a 
    declaration from the Responsible Officer together with information 
    demonstrating that the exchange visitor is pursuing or has at all time 
    maintained an intent to pursue the original exchange program activity 
    for which the exchange visitor was admitted to the United States, along 
    with documentary evidence supporting the declaration. The declaration 
    should also explain (1) why and how the violation of program status 
    resulted from circumstances beyond the control of the Responsible 
    Officer or the exchange visitor or from administrative delay or 
    oversight inadvertence, or neglect on the part of the Responsible 
    Office or the exchange visitor, or (2) why and how failure to receive 
    reinstatement to valid program status would result in unusual hardship 
    to the exchange visitor. (As stated above, both test must be met if the 
    exchange visitor failed to maintain valid program status for 120 or 
    more calendar days.) The Agency expects the Responsible Officer to make 
    reasonable inquiries to verify that the information supporting the 
    application for reinstatement is true, particularly with respect to the 
    declaration that the exchange visitor is pursuing or was at all times 
    intending to pursue the original exchange program activity for which 
    the exchange visitor was admitted to the United States.
        The request for reinstatement also is to include copies of all of 
    the exchange visitor's Forms IAP-66 issued to date and a new completed 
    Form IAP-66, indicating in Block 3 the date for which reinstatement is 
    sought (namely, the new program end date). The new Form IAP-66 
    submitted to the Agency is to include all copies, including the green 
    copy for the exchange visitor. The Form IAP-66 is to be prepared in the 
    same manner as is done for an Extension of Program (Sec. 514.43), 
    Transfer of Program (Sec. 514.42), or Change of Category (Sec. 514.41). 
    In addition to marking ``Extend an ongoing program,'' ``Transfer to a 
    different program,'' or ``Begin a new program'' in the ``Purpose'' box 
    located in the Form's upper right hand corner, also mark 
    ``Reinstatement Request'' in the ``Purpose'' box. If the older ``E'' 
    series Form IAP-66 is still being used, type in the words 
    ``Reinstatement Request'' in the ``Purpose'' box.
        If the Agency determines that reinstatement is warranted, Box 6 on 
    the new Form IAP-66 will be stamped, dated, and signed by the Agency to 
    indicate that reinstatement has been granted. The effective date of the 
    reinstatement will be the date on which the application for 
    reinstatement was received by the Agency.
        The Agency has consulted with the Service with respect to the date 
    on which reinstatements are to be made effective. The Agency had 
    considered making the reinstatement effective nunc pro tunc, i.e., 
    effective on the date on which the exchange visitor first failed to
    
    [[Page 44126]]
    
    maintain valid program status. However, the Service has raised concerns 
    that the agency's nunc pro tunc reinstatement provisions may be 
    inconsistent with the Service's forthcoming F-1 (Student) regulations. 
    In order to ensure regulatory consistency, the Agency has decided to 
    make its reinstatement regulation mirror the Service's with respect to 
    the date on which reinstatement is effective. The exchange community 
    has voiced concern that the Agency's failure to make reinstatement 
    effective nunc pro tunc will create a time gap wherein the exchange 
    visitor might be deemed to have failed to maintain valid nonimmigrant 
    status for a period of time, thus triggering the ``unlawful presence'' 
    sanctions provided in the Illegal Immigration Reform And Immigrant 
    Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRAIRA). However, based on the Service's 
    current interpretation of ``unlawful presence'' of nonimmigrants 
    admitted for ``duration of status'' (D/S), the Agency remains convinced 
    that the ``gap'' will not result in any prejudice to the exchange 
    visitor. Should the Service alter its interpretation of ``unlawful 
    presence,'' the Agency will revisit this issue.
        The new Form IAP-66 (minus the yellow copy) will be returned to the 
    Responsible Officer. An Agency decision denying reinstatement is not 
    appealable.
        2. Non-reinstatable violations. The Interim Final Rule list six 
    violations or other conditions which preclude reinstatement. These 
    include instances: (1) when the exchange visitor willfully fails to 
    maintain the health and accident insurance required under 22 CFR 
    514.14; (2) when the exchange visitor has engaged in employment not 
    authorized by the Exchange Visitor Program's or the Service's 
    regulations; (3) when the exchange visitor has been suspended or 
    terminated from the most recent exchange visitor program; (4) when the 
    exchange visitor has failed to maintain valid program status for more 
    than 270 days; (5) when the exchange visitor has received a favorable 
    recommendation from the Agency on an application of waiver of section 
    212(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the two-year home 
    residency requirement;) or, (6) when the exchange visitor has failed to 
    pay the fee mandated by Public Law 104-208 (the ``CIPRIS'' fee). Note: 
    The overwhelming majority of exchange visitors fall in the ``college 
    and university student'' category. The Agency has decided on the 270-
    day outer limit, not because that number has any relevance to time 
    periods set forth in the immigration laws. Rather, 270 days is the 
    average length of an academic year, and it is the Agency's view that 
    the failure to maintain valid program status for the equivalent of one 
    academic year cannot arguably be considered to have been caused by 
    circumstances beyond the control of the exchange visitor or by 
    administrative delay or oversight, inadvertence or neglect. Moreover, 
    the failure to maintain valid program status for more than 270 days 
    presumptively demonstrates a failure to maintain an interest in 
    continuing the exchange visitor's original program objective.
    
    Comments
    
        The Agency invites comments on this Interim Final Rule from all 
    interested parties, notwithstanding the fact that it is under no legal 
    obligation to do so. The oversight and administration of the Exchange 
    Visitor Program are deemed to be foreign affairs functions of the 
    United States Government. The Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 
    553(a)(1) (1989) specifically exempts foreign affairs functions from 
    the rulemaking requirements of the Act.
        The Agency will accept comments for 30 days following publication 
    of this Interim Final Rule in the Federal Register. A final rule will 
    be adopted upon Agency review of all comments received. Comments should 
    be mailed to the address listed above.
        In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Agency certifies that this 
    rule does not have a significant adverse economic impact on a 
    substantial number of small entities. This rule is not considered to be 
    a significant regulatory action within the meaning of section 3(f) of 
    Executive Order 12866, nor does this rule have Federalism implications 
    warranting the preparation of a Federalism Assessment in accordance 
    with Executive Order 12612.
    
    List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 514
    
        Cultural exchange programs.
    
        Dated: August 6, 1999.
    Les Jin,
    General Counsel.
    
        Accordingly, 22 CFR part 514 is amended as follows:
    
    PART 514--EXCHANGE
    
        1. The authority citation for part 514 continues to read as 
    follows:
    
        Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101(A)(15)(J), 1182, 1184, 1258; 22 U.S.C. 
    1431-1442, 2451-2460; Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1977, 3 CFR Comp. 
    P. 200; E.O. 12048 of March 27, 1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp. P. 168.
    
        2. Section 514.45 is added to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 514.45  Reinstatement to valid program status.
    
        (a) Definitions. For purpose of this section--
        You means the Responsible Officer or Alternate Responsible Officer;
        Exchange visitor means the person who enters the United States on a 
    J visa in order to participate in an exchange program designated by the 
    Director of the United States Information Agency.
        Fails or failed maintain valid program status means the status of 
    an exchange visitor who has completed, concluded, ceased, interrupted, 
    graduated from, or otherwise terminated the exchange visitor's 
    participation in the exchange program, or who remains in the United 
    States beyond the end date on the exchange visitor's current Form IAP-
    66.
        Unauthorized employment means any employment not properly 
    authorized by you or by the Attorney General, i.e., the Immigration and 
    Naturalization Service, prior to commencement of employment. 
    Unauthorized employment does not include activities that are normally 
    approvable, as described in paragraph (c)(3) of this section.
        We, our, or us means the office of Exchange Visitor Program 
    Services of the United States Information Agency.
        (b) Who is authorized to correct minor or technical infractions of 
    the Exchange Visitor Program regulations? (1) If the exchange visitor 
    committed a technical or minor infraction of the regulations, you are 
    authorized to correct the exchange visitor's records with respect to 
    such technical or minor infractions of the regulations in this part. 
    Your correction of such an infraction(s) returns the exchange visitor 
    to the status quo ante, i.e., it is as if the infraction never 
    occurred.
        (2) You may only correct the exchange visitor's record with respect 
    to a technical or minor infraction of the regulations in this part if 
    the exchange visitor is pursuing or intending to pursue the exchange 
    visitor's original program objective.
        (3) You may not correct the exchange visitor's records with respect 
    to a technical or minor infraction of the regulations in this part if 
    the exchange visitor has willfully failed to maintain insurance 
    coverage during the period for which the record is being corrected; if 
    the exchange visitor has engaged in unauthorized employment during that 
    period, as defined in paragraph (a) of this section, of if the exchange 
    visitor was involuntarily suspended or terminated from his or her 
    program during the period.
        (4) If the exchange visitor has failed to maintain valid program 
    status because of a substantive violation of the
    
    [[Page 44127]]
    
    regulations in this part, you must apply to us for reinstatement.
        (c) What violations or infractions of the regulations in this part 
    do we consider to be technical or minor ones, and how do you correct 
    the record? We consider the following to be examples of technical or 
    minor infractions which you are authorized to correct:
        (1) Failure to extend the Form IAP-66 in a timely manner (i.e., 
    prior to the end date on the current Form IAP-66) due to inadvertence 
    or neglect on your part or on the part of the exchange visitor.
        (2) Failure on the part of the exchange visitor to conclude a 
    transfer of program prior to the end date on the current Form IAP-66 
    due to administrative delay or oversight, inadvertence or neglect on 
    your part or on the part of the exchange visitor;
        (3) Failure to receive your prior approval and/or an amended Form 
    IAP-66 before accepting an honorarium or other type of payment for 
    engaging in a normally approvable and appropriate activity. Example, a 
    lecture, consultation, or other activity appropriate to the category 
    which is provided by a professor, research scholar, short-term scholar 
    or specialist without prior approval or an amended Form IAP-66 issued 
    prior to the occurrence of the activity.
        (4) You correct the record status quo ante by issuing a Form IAP-66 
    or by writing an authorization letter to reflect the continuity in the 
    program or the permission to engage in the activity that a timely 
    issued document would have reflected.
        (i) Forms IAP-66 should be:
        (A) Issued to show continued authorized stay without interruption;
        (B) Marked in the ``purpose'' box with the appropriate purpose 
    (i.e., extension, transfer, etc.) and with the additional notation of 
    ``correct the record'' typed in;
        (C) Dated as of the date the Form was actually executed; and,
        (D) Submitted to the Agency in the same way as any other 
    notification.
        (ii) Letters or other authorization documents should be:
        (A) Issued according to the regulations in this part appropriate to 
    the category and the activity;
        (B) Marked or annotated to show ``correct the record,''
        (C) Dated as of the date the letter or document was actually 
    executed; and,
        (D) Attached to the exchange visitor's Form IAP-66 and/or retained 
    in the sponsor's file as required by the regulations in this part for 
    that particular type of letter or document.
        (d) How do you determine if an infraction, other than those 
    examples listed above is a technical or minor infraction? It is 
    impossible to list every example of a technical or minor infraction. To 
    guide you in making a determination, you are to examine the following 
    criteria:
        (1) Regardless of the reason, has the exchange visitor failed to 
    maintain valid program status for more than 120 calendar days after the 
    end date on the current Form IAP-66?
        (2) Has the exchange visitor, by his or her actions, failed to 
    maintain, at all relevant times, his or her original program objective?
        (3) Has the exchange visitor willfully failed to comply with our 
    insurance coverage requirements (Sec. 514.14)?
        (4) Has the exchange visitor engaged in unauthorized employment, as 
    that term is defined in paragraph (a) of this section?
        (5) Has the exchange visitor category been involuntarily suspended 
    or terminated from his or her program?
        (6) Has an exchange visitor in the student category failed to 
    maintain a full course of study (as defined in Sec. 514.2) without 
    prior consultation with you and the exchange visitor's academic 
    advisor?
        (7) Has the exchange visitor failed to pay the fee mandated by 
    Public Law 104-208 (the ``CIPRIS'' fee)?
        (8) If the answer to any of the above questions is ``yes,'' then 
    the infraction is not a technical or minor one and you are not 
    authorized to reinstate the exchange visitor to valid program status.
        (e) Which violations or infractions do we consider to be 
    substantive ones requiring you to apply to us for reinstatement? The 
    following are substantive violations or infractions of the regulations 
    in this part by the exchange visitor which require you to apply to us 
    for reinstatement to valid program status:
        (1) Failure to maintain valid program status for more than 120 days 
    after the end date on the current Form IAP-66;
        (2) If a student, failure to maintain a full course of study (as 
    defined in Sec. 514.2) without prior consultation with you and the 
    exchange visitor's academic advisor.
        (f) Which, if any, violations of the regulations in this part or 
    other conditions preclude reinstatement and will result in a denial if 
    application is made? We will not consider requests for reinstatement 
    (nor should you) when an exchange visitor has:
        (1) Knowingly or willfully failed to obtain or maintain the 
    required health insurance (Sec. 514.14) at all times while in the 
    United States;
        (2) Engaged in unauthorized employment, as that term is defined in 
    paragraph (a) of this section;
        (3) Been suspended or terminated from the most recent exchange 
    visitor program;
        (4) Failed to maintain valid program status for more than 270 
    calendar days;
        (5) Received a favorable recommendation from the Agency on an 
    application for waiver of section 212(e) of the Immigration and 
    Nationality Act [8 U.S.C. 1182(e)]; or,
        (6) Failed to pay the fee mandated by Public Law 104-208 (the 
    ``CIPRIS'' fee.)
        (g) What if you cannot determine which category (technical, 
    substantive, or non-reinstatable) the violation or infraction falls 
    within? If you cannot determine which category the violation or 
    condition falls within, then you must, on behalf of the exchange 
    visitor, apply to us for reinstatement.
        (h) If you determine that the exchange visitor's violation of the 
    regulations in this part is a substantive one, how do you apply for a 
    reinstatement to valid program status? (1) If you determine that the 
    violation of the regulations in this part is a substantive one, and 
    that the exchange visitor has failed to maintain valid program status 
    for 120 days or less, you must apply to us for reinstatement of the 
    exchange visitor to valid program status. Your application must 
    include:
        (i) All copies of the exchange visitor's Forms IAP-66 issued to 
    date;
        (ii) A new, completed Form IAP-66, showing in Block 3 the date of 
    the period for which reinstatement is sought, i.e., the new program end 
    date;
        (iii) A copy of the receipt showing that the Public Law 104-208 fee 
    has been paid; and,
        (iv) A written statement (and documentary information supporting 
    such statement):
        (A) Declaring that the exchange visitor is pursuing or was at all 
    times intending to pursue the original exchange visitor program 
    activity for which the exchange visitor was admitted to the United 
    States; and,
        (B) Showing that the exchange visitor failed to maintain valid 
    program status due to circumstances beyond the control of the exchange 
    visitor, or from administrative delay or oversight, inadvertence, or 
    excusable neglect on your part or the exchange visitor's part; or,
        (C) Showing that it would be an unusual hardship to the exchange 
    visitor if we do not grant the reinstatement to valid program status.
        (2) If you determine that the violation of the regulations is a 
    substantive one, and that the exchange visitor has failed to maintain 
    valid program status for more than 120 days, then you must apply to us 
    for reinstatement of the
    
    [[Page 44128]]
    
    exchange visitor to valid program status. Your application must 
    include:
        (i) Copies of all the exchange visitor's Forms IAP-66 issued to 
    date;
        (ii) A new, completed Form IAP-66, showing in Block 3 the date for 
    which reinstatement is sought, i.e., the new program end date;
        (iii) A copy of the receipt showing that the Pub. L. 104-208 fee 
    has been paid; and,
        (iv) A written statement (together with documentary evidence 
    supporting such statement):
        (A) Declaring that the exchange visitor is pursuing or was at all 
    times intending to pursue the exchange visitor program activity for 
    which the exchange visitor was admitted to the United States; and,
        (B) Showing that the exchange visitor failed to maintain valid 
    program status due to circumstances beyond the control of the exchange 
    visitor, or from administrative delay or oversight, inadvertence, or 
    excusable neglect on your part or the exchange visitor's part; and,
        (C) Showing that it would be an unusual hardship to the exchange 
    visitor if we do not grant the reinstatement to valid program status.
        (i) How will we notify you of our decision on your request for 
    reinstatement? (1) If we deny your request for reinstatement, we will 
    notify you by letter.
        (2) If we approve your request for reinstatement, we will notify 
    you:
        (i) By stamping Box 6 on the new Form IAP-66 to show that 
    reinstatement was granted, effective as of the date on which the 
    application for reinstatement was received by the Exchange Visitor 
    Program Services office; and
        (ii) By returning the new Form IAP-66 for the exchange visitor.
        (j) How long will it take us to act on your request for 
    reinstatement? We will act on your request for reinstatement within 
    forty-five days from the date on which we receive the request and 
    supporting documentation.
        (k) Are you required to notify us each time that you correct a 
    record? No special notification is necessary. Submission of the 
    notification copy of Form IAP-66 to the Agency serves as notice that a 
    record has been corrected. Following the regulations in this part in 
    issuing a letter or document serves as correction in the sponsor's file 
    for those items not normally sent to the Agency under existing 
    notification procedures.
    
    [FR Doc. 99-20783 Filed 8-12-99; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 8230-01-M
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
8/13/1999
Published:
08/13/1999
Department:
United States Information Agency
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Interim Final Rule with request for comments.
Document Number:
99-20783
Dates:
This Interim Final Rule is effective on August 13, 1999. Comments regarding this rulemaking will be accepted until September 13, 1999.
Pages:
44123-44128 (6 pages)
PDF File:
99-20783.pdf
CFR: (1)
22 CFR 514.45