Advanced search    Help

Clear all search criteria

Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).

• Policy Memorandum: Parole of Spouses, Children and Parents of Active Duty Members of the U.S. Armed Forces, the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve, and Former Members of the U.S. Armed Forces or Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve and the Effect of Parole on Inadmissibility under Immigration and Nationality Act § 212(a)(6)(A)(i)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This policy memorandum (PM) amends Chapter 21.1 of the Adjudicator's Field Manual (AFM) to ensure consistent adjudication of parole requests made on behalf of aliens who are present without admission or parole and who are spouses, children and parents of those serving on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces, in the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve or who previously served in the U.S. Armed Forces or Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve. This PM also amends AFM Chapter 40.6 concerning the effects of parole on an alien's inadmissibility under Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) § 212(a)(6)(A)(i). This amendment to AFM chapter 40.6 applies to any paroled alien, not only to the family members of Armed Forces personnel."

  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

  2013-11-15
• Appendix B - UNHCR Monitoring Plan: Canada - United States 'Safe Third Country' Agreement

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Safe Third Country agreement (hereinafter 'the Agreement') notes, in keeping with the advice of UNHCR [United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees] and its Executive Committee, that agreements among states may enhance international protection of refugees by promotion of orderly handling of asylum applications by the responsible party and the principle of burden sharing. The Agreement acknowledges the international legal obligations of the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States (the 'Parties') under the principle of 'non-refoulement' outlined in the 1951 Convention and its 1967 Protocol, as well as the 1984 Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Convention Against Torture). The Agreement notes the Parties' determination to safeguard for each eligible refugee claimant on its territory access to a full and fair refugee status determination procedure as a means to afford the protections of the 1951 Convention, its Protocol and the Convention Against Torture."

  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

  2004-12-14
• Appendix C - Agreement Between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "In this Agreement, [a.] 'Country of Last Presence' means that country, being either Canada or the United States, in which the refugee claimant was physically present immediately prior to making a refugee status claim at a land border port of entry. [b.] 'Family Member' means the spouse, sons, daughters, parents, legal guardians, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, nieces, and nephews. [c.] 'Refugee Status Claim' means a request from a person to the government of either Party for protection consistent with the Convention or the Protocol, the Torture Convention, or other protection grounds in accordance with the respective laws of each Party. [d.] 'Refugee Status Claimant' means any person who makes a refugee status claim in the territory of one of the Parties. [e.] 'Refugee Status Determination System' means the sum of laws and administrative and judicial practices employed by each Party's national government for the purpose of adjudicating refugees status claims. [f.] 'Unaccompanied Minor' means an unmarried refugee status claimant who has not yet reached his or her eighteenth birthday and does not have a parent or legal guardian in either Canada or the United States."

  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

  2002-12-05
• Memorandum: Adjudication of EB-5 Regional Center Proposals and Affiliated Form I-526 and Form I-829 Petitions; Adjudicators Field Manual (AFM) Update to Chapters 22.4 and 25.2 (AD09-38)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This memorandum provides instruction to California Service Center (CSC) personnel involved in the adjudication of EB-5 Regional Center Proposals, and affiliated Forms I-526, Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur and Forms I-829, Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions. This memorandum rescinds in its entirety the USCIS [U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services] memorandum, Establishment of an Investor and Regional Center Unit, dated January 19, 2005, and provides guidance regarding: 1. The timing of the adjudication of EB-5 eligibility issues; 2. The procedures to be used when there appears to be a material change in circumstances relating to an eligibility issue following the issue's prior adjudicative resolution; 3. Targeted Employment Area (TEA) determinations; 4. How an alien may seek approval of a new Form I-526 petition in order to change the focus of his or her investment to a new capital investment project or commercial enterprise; and 5. The respective EB-5 program responsibilities of CSC and Service Center Operations (SCOPS) personnel. This memorandum also addresses the issue of communication with non-USCIS individuals or entities regarding case specific information."

  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

  Neufeld, Donald

  2009-12-11
• Memorandum: Publication of the Final Rules: H-2A Agricultural Temporary Worker and H-2B Nonagricultural Temporary Worker

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The purpose of this memorandum is to provide guidance for processing and adjudicating Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker, filed on behalf of H-2A agricultural temporary workers and H-2B nonagricultural temporary workers."

  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

  Neufeld, Donald

  2009-06-24
• Memorandum: Determining Employer-Employee Relationship for Adjudication of H-1B Petitions, Including Third-Party Site Placements

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This memorandum is intended to provide guidance, in the context of H-1B-petitions, on the requirement that a petitioner establish that an employer-employee relationship exists and will continue to exist with the beneficiary throughout the duration of the requested H -1 B validity period."

  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

  Neufeld, Donald

  2010-01-08
• Questions and Answers: DHS Procedures for Implementation of EOIR Background Check Regulations for Aliens Seeking Relief or Protection from Removal

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This document from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Answers 29 questions regarding Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR). Examples of the questions are: "1. What are the purposes of the Background Check Regulations issued by the Department of Justice's Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) at 70 FR 4743 (January 31, 2005)(codified at 8 C.F.R. §§ 1003.1, 1003.19, 1003.47, 1208.4, 1208.10, and 1208.14)? 2. What procedures has DHS implemented to ensure that the identity, background and security checks are completed and do not delay the EOIR proceedings? What are the principal applications that must be submitted to the USCIS service centers? Can I also submit copies of applications for Section 212(c) waivers and for other waivers of grounds of inadmissibility that I must file with EOIR? Where should I submit and pay the fees for petitions such as the Form I-130 (Petition for Alien Relative), Form I-140 (Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker), and the Form I-751 (Petition to Remove the Conditions on Residence)? [and] 5. I have an application pending with the immigration court or the BIA for relief or protection. Where should I file a Form I-765 for an Employment Authorization Document (EAD) while I am in removal proceedings?"

  United States. Department of Homeland Security; U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services; U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

  2006-08-08
• E-Verify Program for Employment Verification Memorandum of Understanding for Designated Agents

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This MOU [Memorandum of Understanding] explains certain features of the E-Verify program and enumerates specific responsibilities of DHS [Department of Homeland Security], SSA [Social Security Administration], the Employer, and the Designated Agent. References to the Employer include the Designated Agent when acting on behalf of the Employer. E-Verify is a program that electronically confirms an employee's eligibility to work in the United States after completion of the Employment Eligibility Verification Form (Form I-9). For covered government contractors, E-Verify is used to verify the employment eligibility of all newly hired employees and all existing employees assigned to Federal contracts or to verify the entire workforce if the contractor so chooses."

  United States. Department of Homeland Security; U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services; United States. Social Security Administration

  2009-09-01
• E-Verify: Enrollment Quick Reference Guide

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Using E-Verify is an important step in ensuring that your company has a legal workforce by electronically confirming the information on Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification. We are here to support you and provide you and your company with the tools and understanding to get the most out of the benefits of E-Verify. This guide is designed to assist you through the E-Verify enrollment"

  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services; United States. Social Security Administration

  2010-03
• Changes to the Vaccination Requirements for Purposes of Adjustment of Status and the Completion of Form I-693, Report of Medical Examination and Vaccination Record

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This memorandum advises USCIS [U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services] officers of the revised vaccination requirements for health-related admissibility under section 212(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act). Effective December 14, 2009, vaccinations against the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) and herpes zoster (zoster) will no longer be required. These changes are applicable to any admissibility determination made under section 212(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Act on or after December 14, 2009.'

  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

  2009
• Memorandum of Agreement between U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Regarding E-verify Program Information Sharing

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The purpose of this MOA [Memorandum of Agreement] is to outline the coordination and management of referrals' between USCIS [U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services] Verification Division and ICE [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement] regarding the misuse, abuse or fraudulent use of the E-Verify Program and ICE requests to USCIS for Verification Information System (VIS) data with regard to ongoing ICE investigations."

  United States. Department of Homeland Security; U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services; U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

  2008-12-30
• E-Verify: Quick Reference Guide for State Workforce Agencies (SWA)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This quick reference guide provides information regarding the use of the E-Verify system for State Workforce Agencies (SWA.) The guide provides information on case, user and site administration. The guide also explains how to generate reports and mail documents.

  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services; United States. Social Security Administration

  2008-08-18
• Question & Answer: USCIS National Stakeholder Meeting [February 24, 2009]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This document is from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) National Stakeholder meeting on February 24, 2009. This document offers four questions from the National Stakeholders and responses from the USCIS regarding United States citizenship and immigration.

  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

  2009-02-24
• Keeping the Border Secure: Examining Potential Threats Posed by Cross-Border Trucking, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection of the Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives, One Hundred Tenth Congress, First Session, June 19, 2007

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the opening statement of Sheila Jackson Lee: "The vulnerability created by allowing foreign carriers to operate freely in the U.S. cannot be overstated. Increasingly, foreign terrorist organizations are getting a foothold in Latin America and exploiting our porous border with Canada to gain entry into the United States. [...] It is well-known that once inside a truck, regardless of what materials he or she may be carrying, a terrorist will have many tools available to him to harm Americans. We need to understand what methods TSA and CBP are putting in place to ensure that, when our borders are finally open to foreign carriers in a large way, we have a process to find out who they are, what they are carrying and where they are going. We want to make sure that we have all of the information so that we have a productive opportunity for the exchange that we are used to, as it relates to people and goods. It is important that we do so. As we do this, we will be able to address the larger question of the relationships between our borders and those on our borders." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Sheila Jackson Lee, Daniel E. Lungren, Henry Cuellar, Peter A. DeFazio, Nita M. Lowey, Ginny Brown-Waite, Bill Arrington, Greg Olsavsky, Stephen Russell, Raul G. Salinas, and Gregg M. Ward.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2009
• Runway Safety: An Update,Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Aviation of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives, One Hundred Tenth Congress, Second Session, September 25, 2008

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the opening statement of Jerry F. Costello: "Runway safety continues to be an aviation safety concern, appearing on the National Transportation Safety Board's Most Wanted List since the list was created in 1990. While we will hear today that the United States has the safest air transportation system in the world, we cannot become complacent about our safety. One accident or near accident is one too many. According to the General Accountability Office, the overall rate for runway incursions for the first three quarters of 2008 has increased slightly compared to 2007. […]. The GAO also cites human factors, such as controller fatigue and miscommunication, as factors in runway safety, and I am interested in hearing more from the panelists, including Mr. Pat Forrey, the President of the National Air Traffic Controller Association, on this issue. As our June 2008 hearing demonstrated, we have a controller staffing shortage and the FAA has been slow to acknowledge the problem or find a solution. […]. The Subcommittee will continue to provide aggressive oversight on this and other issues until these provisions become law. As I have stated time and time again, safety must not be compromised in an effort to save money or for a lack of resources or attention." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: James M. Crites, Gerald Dillingham, Patrick Forrey, Hank Krakowski, John Prater, Russ Carnahan, Jerry F. Costello, Harry E. Mitchell, James L, Obserstar, Laura A. Richerdson, and Jason Altmire.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2008
• Expanding ESL, Civics, and Citizenship Education in Your Community: A Start-Up Guide

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This guide outlines a start-up process of gathering relevant information and resources to help you develop and sustain your program, recruit and train volunteers, and recruit students. It also includes basic recommendations and sample forms and materials to help you start your program. This guide is not intended to be a curriculum. Curricula and teaching guidelines can be found through the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) resource entitled U.S. Civics and Citizenship Online: Resource Center for Instructors, located at http://www.uscis.gov/civicsonline, and through adult education publishers, local community colleges, and other Internet websites. Using this guide to establish your program can help you offer a rewarding and important service to immigrants and your community."

  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

  2009-02
• U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services: Backlog Elimination Plan: Fiscal Year 2006, 3rd Quarter Update

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The USCIS quarterly report is designed to provide Congress with an update on the progress USCIS has made in its effort to eliminate the backlog of pending applications for immigration benefits by the end of FY 2006 and attain a six-month processing goal for many types of applications. This report will cover the progress made during the 3rd Quarter of FY 2006. Changes in the number of pending applications are themselves significant when looking at performance. In the 3rd Quarter of FY 2006, the number of pending applications increased by 12,018 to a total of 3.36 million from the 3.34 million applications pending at the end of the 2nd Quarter of FY 2006. While a good indicator of performance, the number of pending applications is also affected by changes in demand and production and, therefore, is not the best indicator of processing time. Current technology systems employed by USCIS District Offices and Service Centers do not produce aging reports from which average wait times or processing times can be calculated based on the actual processing age of each case. USCIS uses the 'Cycle Time' measurement, in other words, the number of pending applications expressed in months of receipts, to closely approximate the average processing time. This is a reliable measure when used with a 'first in, first out' adjudications policy."

  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

  2006-12-11
• Nonimmigrant Admissions to the United States: 2009

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Nonimmigrants are foreign nationals granted temporary entry into the United States. The major purposes for which nonimmigrant admission may be authorized include temporary visits for business or pleasure, academic or vocational study, temporary employment, and to act as a representative of a foreign government or international organization. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) collects information on the characteristics of certain nonimmigrant admissions, those recorded on the I-94 Arrival/Departure Record. This Office of Immigration Statistics Annual Flow Report presents information gathered from the I-94 on the number and characteristics of nonimmigrant admissions to the United States in 2009."

  United States. Department of Homeland Security; U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

  Barr, Macreadie; Monger, Randall

  2010-04
• U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services: Backlog Elimination Plan: Fiscal Year 2006, 1st Quarter Update

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The USCIS quarterly report is designed to provide Congress with an update on the progress USCIS has made in its effort to eliminate the backlog of pending applications for immigration benefits by the end of FY 2006 and attain a six-month processing goal for many types of applications. This report will cover the progress made during the 1st Quarter of FY 2006. Changes in the number of pending applications are themselves significant when looking at performance. In the 1st Quarter of FY 2006, the number of pending applications fell by 268,276 to a total of 3.47 million from the 3.74 million applications pending at the end of the 4th Quarter of FY 2005. However, the number of pending applications is affected by changes in demand and production and, while a good indicator of performance, is not the best indicator of processing time. Current technology systems employed by USCIS District Offices and Service Centers do not produce aging reports from which average wait times or processing times can be calculated. USCIS uses the 'Cycle Time' measurement, in other words, the number of pending applications expressed in months of receipts, to closely approximate the average processing time. This is a reliable measure when used with a 'first in, first out' adjudications policy."

  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

  2006-08-07
• Westat Evaluation of the E-Verify Program: USCIS Synopsis of Key Findings and Program Implications

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "E-Verify is a free nationwide program currently used by over 180,000 employers at over 675,000 worksites as the best available tool to help employers determine whether their employees are authorized to work in the United States. After registering for E-Verify, employers submit information for newly-hired employees1 from the Form I-9 (SSN, name, date of birth, and citizenship status, and if relevant, A-number or I-94 number) to E-Verify, where it is checked against information in Social Security Administration (SSA) and Department of Homeland Security databases as appropriate, over a secure Internet connection.[…] As USCIS continues to improve and expand E-Verify, feedback from all of our stakeholders, including independent evaluators, has been invaluable and serves as a benchmark against which to measure our progress. The independence of the evaluation is important for several reasons. It ensures confidentiality for participants who answer survey questions, which makes them more likely to give truthful answers about their policies and actions related to the E-Verify program. It provides Congress and other stakeholders with a non-biased assessment of the program and prevents a conflict of interest in the findings. It also allows valuable double-checking of program statistics, system operations, and informational materials. The evaluation team approaches the program from an outside, objective vantage point and can give important feedback on how the system works from an outsider's perspective. As USCIS (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services) continues to improve and expand E-Verify, feedback from all of our stakeholders, including independent evaluators, has been invaluable and serves as a benchmark against which to measure our progress. The independence of the evaluation is important for several reasons. It ensures confidentiality for participants who answer survey questions, which makes them more likely to give truthful answers about their policies and actions related to the E-Verify program. It provides Congress and other stakeholders with a non-biased assessment of the program and prevents a conflict of interest in the findings."

  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

  2010-01-28
• Citizenship and Immigration Services Summary of Form I-90, Replacement of Lost, Stolen and Destroyed Forms I-551, Permanent Resident Cards Benefit Fraud Assessment (BFA) Report

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) developed and implemented a Benefit Fraud Assessment (BFA) to measure the integrity of specific nonimmigrant and immigrant applications/petitions by conducting administrative inquiries on randomly selected cases.1 This is referred to as an assessment because the cases are not attached to any suspicions of fraud; they are a combination of applications filed over a specific six-month period. For the purposes of the BFA, fraud is defined as a willful misrepresentation or falsification of a material fact. The results of the BFA will serve as a basis for proposed changes to existing regulations, policies, and procedures, and if warranted, legislative remedies. In keeping with the USCIS/U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) anti-fraud joint strategy, cases identified with preliminary findings of fraud will be referred to ICE for criminal investigation and possible prosecution and removal. All national security-related information will also be forwarded to ICE. If ICE declines to open a criminal investigation, FDNS will provide USCIS' Adjudications Operation a report of its fraud findings for the appropriate adjudicative action, i.e., denial, revocation, etc. BFA case data will also be entered into the FDNS Data System,2 so that the information can be tracked and known fraud indicators bounced against incoming receipts {in the event another fraud is attempted}."

  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

  2006-07
• Fact Sheet: Iraqi Refugee Processing [February 11, 2009]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) is an inter-agency effort involving a number of governmental and non-governmental partners, both overseas and domestically, whose mission is to resettle refugees in the United States. The U.S. Department of State's (DOS) Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM) has overall management responsibility for the USRAP and has the lead in proposing admissions numbers and processing priorities. Within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has responsibility for interviewing refugee applicants and adjudicating applications for refugee status. […]. Part of the humanitarian mission of the USRAP is to provide resettlement opportunities to especially vulnerable Iraqi refugees. Since large-scale Iraqi refugee processing was announced in February 2007, DHS and DOS have worked cooperatively to increase the number of Iraqi refugees admitted to the United States as part of the worldwide commitment. Throughout fiscal year 2008, DHS and DOS worked closely to enhance processing capacity of Iraqi refugee applicants while ensuring the highest level of security. In support of these efforts, USCIS deployed more than 150 officers to the Middle East to conduct 29 refugee processing circuit rides and interviewed more than 23,000 Iraqi refugee applicants. As a result of this collaboration, the USRAP admitted more than 13,800 Iraqi refugees in fiscal year 2008. Not only did this admission level exceed the U.S. government's goals to resettle 12,000 Iraqis, but it reflects a significant increase over the approximately 1,600 Iraqis admitted the prior fiscal year."

  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

  2009-02-11
• Maritime Transportation: The Role of U.S Ships and Mariners, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, May 21, 2013

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the May 21, 2013 hearing, "Maritime Transportation: The Role of U.S Ships and Mariners," before the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation. From the opening statement of Duncan Hunter: "The Subcommittee is meeting today to review the current state of the U.S. maritime sector and examine the importance of U.S.-flagged vessels and American mariners to our economy and national security. The U.S. maritime industry currently employs more than 260,000 Americans providing nearly $29 billion in annual wages. There are more than 40,000 commercial vessels currently flying the American flag. The vast majority of these vessels are engaged in domestic commerce, moving over 100 million passengers and $400 billion worth of goods between ports in the U.S. on an annual basis. Each year, the U.S. maritime industry accounts for over $100 billion in economic output. Beyond the important contributions to our economy, a healthy maritime industry is vital to our national security." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Duncan Hunter, John D. Porcari, William M. Fraser, III, Fred Harris, Joseph H. Pyne, Augustin Tellez, and Mike Jewell.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2014
• 2012 Customer Satisfaction Survey: E-Verify

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This report focuses on the customer satisfaction of companies currently enrolled in the E-Verify program. Satisfaction with E-Verify remains high and follows up a three-point gain in 2011 with a one-point improvement in 2012 for a satisfaction index of 86. This is 19 points above the current federal government average. Two segments of E-Verify Users were also measured. Recent users, those who had run a case since January 1, 2012, had satisfaction of 87, also a one-point improvement for this group. […] The customer satisfaction model that was developed identified five areas which potentially drive satisfaction with E-Verify. The five drivers of satisfaction remain very highly rated with two of them rated in the 90s. There were no significant changes in the scores of these drivers with scores either holding at last year's level or improving one point. The Photo Matching Process is again rated the highest at 95. The process was easy and users felt that Photo Matching was very helpful in preventing fraud. Using E-Verify is the other driver rated in the 90s. Additionally, it has a very strong impact on satisfaction. In Using E-Verify, submitting I-9 information was easy as was navigating the E-Verify site. The initial response was received in a very timely manner and the next steps were clearly described in the response."

  United States. Department of Homeland Security; U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

  2013-01
• ATC Modernization and NextGen Near-Term Achievable Goals, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Aviation of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives, One Hundred Eleventh Congress, First Session, March 18, 2009

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the opening statement of Jerry F. Costello: "I welcome everyone to the Subcommittee hearing today on 'Air Traffic Control [ATC] Modernization and Next-Generation Air Transportation Systems: Near-Term Achievable Goals,' which is being conducted as one of several hearings that meet the oversight requirement of the rules of the House. This is the first of several hearings that the Aviation Subcommittee will hold this year on NextGen, covering a wide range of topics. Everyone agrees that our ATC system must be modernized. The total number of passengers carried in the United States airspace was approximately 700 million a year and is expected to go to 1 billion in the next 7 to 12 years. For that and other reasons, it is very important that we, not only the House but also the other body, quickly pass the FAA [Federal Aviation Administration] reauthorization bill. H.R. 915, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009, authorizes $13.4 billion for the FAA's facility and equipment account, the primary vehicle for modernizing the national airspace system. These historic funding levels will accelerate the implementation of NextGen, enable the FAA to replace and repair existing facilities and equipment, and provide for the implementation of high-priority safety-related systems." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Marion C. Blakey, Tom Brantley, Peter J. Bunce, Victoria Cox, Gerald Dillingham, Patrick Forrey, Rory Kay, James C. May, Calvin L. Scovel, III, Agam Sinha, Robert M. Tobias, Karlin Toner, Russ Carnahan, Jerry F. Costello, Eddie Bernice Johnson, Michael E. McMahon, Harry E. Mitchell, James L. Oberstar, and Laura A. Richardson.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2009
• Overview of the United States Freight Transportation System, Hearing Before the Panel on 21st-Century Freight Transportation, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, April 24, 2013

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the April 24, 2013 hearing, "Overview of the United States' Freight Transportation System," before the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Panel on 21st-Century Freight Transportation. From the opening statement of John J. Duncan, Jr.: "Good morning and welcome to the first hearing of the 'Panel on 21st Century Freight Transportation.' Rule 18 of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee rules allows the Chairman, with the concurrence of the ranking member, to designate a special panel to inquire into any matter within the Committee's jurisdiction. Chairman Shuster and Ranking Member Rahall have designated this panel to examine the current state of freight transportation in the United States and how improving freight transportation can strengthen the United States economy. I am honored to be selected to chair this Special Panel and I am excited to be working with Congressman Nadler from New York as the Panel's Ranking Member. The safe and efficient movement of freight throughout the Nation impacts the day-to-day lives of every American. From the clothes you wear to the car you drive to the food you eat, the freight transportation system impacts all aspects of everyday life." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Frederick W. Smith, Charles W. Moorman, Derek J. Leathers, James I. Newsome III, Edward Wytkind, Janice Hahn, John J. Duncan, Bill Shuster, Nick J. Rahall II, A.L. Lotts, Judy Chu, Grace F. Napolitano, Adam B. Schiff, and Kurt J. Nagle.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2013
• Handbook for Employers; guidance for completing Form I-9 (employment eligibility Verification Form) [Revised March, 8, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "In 1986, Congress reformed U.S. immigration laws. These reforms, the result of a bipartisan effort, preserved the tradition of legal immigration while seeking to close the door to illegal entry. The employer sanctions provisions, found in section 274A of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), were added by the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA). These pro-visions further changed with the passage of the Immigration Act of 1990 and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996. Employment is often the magnet that attracts individuals to reside in the United States illegally. The purpose of the employer sanctions law is to remove this magnet by requiring employers to hire only individuals who may legally work here: U.S. citizens, noncitizen nationals, lawful permanent residents, and aliens authorized to work. To comply with the law, employers must verify the identity and employment authorization of each person they hire, complete and retain a Form I-9, 'Employment Eligibility Verification', for each employee, and refrain from discriminating against individuals on the basis of national origin or citizenship. (See Part Four for more information on unlawful discrimination.) Form I-9 helps employers to verify individuals who are authorized to work in the United States. You, as an employer, must complete a Form I-9 for every new employee you hire after November 6, 1986. This Handbook provides guidance on how to properly complete Form I-9 and answers frequently asked questions about the law as it relates to Form I-9."

  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

  2013-03-08
• Sitting on Our Assets: Rehabilitating and Improving Our Nation's Rail Infrastructure, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, First Session, February 17, 2011

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the opening statement of Bill Shuster: "We worked together for the past four years, and I look forward to continue to work closely with her on a bipartisan manner to improve rail, pipelines, and, of course, the movement of hazardous materials in the country. The hearing today, though, is dealing with the RRIF program, the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Program, known as the RRIF program, which was originally created in 1998 as a dedicated source of loan funding for railroads' infrastructure needs. It was limited to $3.5 billion in total outstanding loans. At that point the Congress recognized the need for strong freight railroad improvement program, and increased that amount to $35 billion. We also strengthened the RRIF program in the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, by increasing the repayment period from 25 years to 35 years. It's also important to note that in the history of the program, we have not had a single default of any of the RRIF loans, and I think there has been one payment that was delayed, and that was be- cause of a flood or some natural disaster occurred. Despite the efforts of the committee, the RRIF program is in serious need of improvement. Chairman Mica has indicated he is interested in pursuing improvement to a number of rail issues, and a rail title to the transportation and reauthorization bill, and ad- dressing the issues in the RRIF program are a top priority." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: William Callison, John E. Fenton, John D. Porcari, Michael Sussman, Richard F. Timmons, Lou Barletta, Jeffrey M. Landry, John L. Petri, Tom Reed, Bill Shuster, and John L Mica.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2011
• Implementing MAP-21: The State and Local Perspective, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Highways and transit of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, April 25, 2013

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the April 25, 2013 hearing, "Implementing MAP-21: The State and Local Perspective," before the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Highways and Transit. From the opening statement of Thomas E. Petri: "Today's hearing is the second in a series of oversight hearings on the U.S. Department of Transportation's (U.S. DOT) implementation of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act, better known as MAP-21. Signed into law by the President last July, MAP-21 authorizes the Federal highway, transit and highway safety programs through September 30, 2014. These programs are administered by U.S. DOT in partnership with states, localities, and public transit agencies. While U.S. DOT provides financial and technical assistance, these partners are responsible for carrying out these programs on a day-to-day basis. Today, we will hear their perspective on U.S. DOT's implementation efforts." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Michael P. Lewis, Bruce Starr, Peter Varga, Richard Perrin, Terry Bobrowski, Edward D. Reiskin, and Elizabeth Treadway.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2013
• Freight and Passenger Rail in America's Transportation System, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, March 5, 2013

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the March 5, 2013 hearing "Freight and Passenger Rail in America's Transportation System" held before the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials of the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. From the opening statement of Jeff Denham: "As you know, passenger and freight rail, coupled with railroad suppliers and union workers play important and dependent roles in our Nation's economy, and are vital to its success. As you all may know, Chairman Shuster and I are committed to rail reauthorization this year. I say again, ''this year.'' And hopefully, this hearing will be a productive start to a bipartisan effort. We need to be pragmatic and transparent, and we will need all parties to participate in order to deliver the best bipartisan product to the House floor. We want to make it a point to welcome all ideas from many viewpoints, in order to make the most robust and comprehensive reauthorization. We thought an educational hearing on our Nation's rail industry would be the best way to start and really have a very productive conversation. Railroads are an integral part of North America's infrastructure network and, in turn, our economic competitiveness. From the building of the Nation's first rail in 1828 until now, both passenger and freight railroads have played a central role in our Nation's development. It is important to note that the U.S. freight rail system is the number one in the world, with our passenger rail system also increasing ridership yearly." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Jeff Denham, Edward R. Hamberger, Paula J. Hammond, James A. Stem, Jr., Joseph H. Boardman, Steve Cohen, and Jerrold Nadler.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2013