Obtaining the Form I-68

Another concern related to the difficulty in obtaining a permit. Currently, persons who wish to enroll in the program must travel, yearly, to a staffed Service office and apply in person. The Service proposes to reduce this burden by allowing persons who are renewing a valid permit to do so by mail. This means that a person who maintains his or her membership in the program will only have to report in person to obtain his or her first permit, unless the district director determines, on a case-by-case basi s to require the applicant to report in person. The Service will evaluate the eligibility of any person to participate in the program by an examination of any records available to the Service. Application forms will also be made available by mail to the public.

The Service will also reduce the burden on the public by considering those persons who are enrolled in one of the Service's Alternative Inspections programs such as the Immigration and Naturalization Service's Passenger Accelerated Service System (INSPASS), the Dedicated Commuter Lane (DCL), or an Automated Permit Port (APP) program to be automatically included in the I-68 program without requiring an additional application or fee. These alternative Inspections programs currently allow program participants the privilege of entering the United States by air or car without having to report for immigration inspection each time they do so. Since only the means of entry differs from the I-68 program, it is logical to include participants in other Alternative Inspections programs in the I-68 program.

Fee

The Service received several complaints concerning the charging of a fee for participation in the I-68 program. As previously stated in the August 7, 1995, final rule, the Federal User Fee Statute (31 U.S.C. 9701) and regulations require that recipients of special benefits bear the cost of providing these services. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-25, User Charges, states as a general policy that reasonable charges should be imposed to recover the full cost to the Federal Government of r endering such services. In July 1993, the Office of the Inspector General completed an audit of services performed and special benefits provided by the Service. The audit concluded that the Service was not in compliance with OMB directives with regard to these services, including the Canadian Border Boat Landing Permit, Form I-68, and that failure to collect fees for services resulted in the cost being paid by the general public out of the general fund appropriation. Accordingly, in 1995 the Service establi shed a fee of $ 16.00 to cover the costs associated with adjudicating an application to participant in the program. This rule will not change the fee.

The Service has also been requested by the Government of Canada to include within the program landed immigrants to Canada who are not citizens of British Commonwealth Countries. At present, for example, a French citizen who is a landed immigrant in Canada is not eligible to participate in the I-68 Program. Upon consideration, the Service has decided to include such persons within the program provided they are nationals of a country designated for participation in the Visa Waiver Pilot Program and are in pos session of a valid unexpired passport issued by their country of nationality, an unexpired, United States visa, and a valid I-94 marked for multiple entries to the United States at both the time they make application for inclusion within the program and each time they take advantage of the program to enter the United States.

The Service's implementation of this rule as an interim rule, with provisions for post-promulgation public comments, is based upon the "good cause" exceptions found at 5 U.S.C. 553 (b)(B) and (d)(3). The reasons and the necessity for immediate implementation of this interim rule without prior notice and comment are as follows: this interim rule relieves a restriction, does not impose a new burden, and is beneficial to the traveling public and United States businesses which are patronized by persons benefit ing from this rule.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), has reviewed this regulation and, by approving it, certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because of the following factors: the Form I-68 is applied for by individuals, not small entities, and the rule simply codifies policies and procedures that have been in place for many years, imposing no additional bur den on applicants or small entities.

Executive Order 12866

This rule is not considered by the Department of Justice, Immigration and Naturalization Service, to be a "significant regulatory action" under Executive Order 12866, section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review, and the Office of Management and Budget has waived its review process under section 6(a)(3)(A).

Executive Order 12612

The regulations proposed herein 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 Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Executive Order 12988 Civil Justice Reform

The rule meets the applicable standards set forth in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of E.O. 12988.

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.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

This rule is not a major rule as defined by Section 804 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. 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 significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign-based companies in domestic and export markets.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This interim rule does not impose any new reporting or recordkeeping requirements. The information collection (Form I-68) was previously approved for use by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the OMB control number 1115-0065.