This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

40540

Vol. 65, No. 127

Friday, June 30, 2000

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Immigration and Naturalization Service

8 CFR Parts 212, 236, and 241

[INS No. 2029–00; AG Order No. 2310–2000]

RIN 1115–AF82

Detention of Aliens Ordered Removed

AGENCY: Immigration and Naturalization

Service, Justice.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This rule would amend the

Immigration and Naturalization Service

(Service) regulations by providing a

uniform review process governing the

detention of criminal, inadmissible, and

other aliens, excluding Mariel Cubans,

who have received a final

administrative removal order but whose

departure has not been effected within

the 90-day removal period. Such a

process is necessary to ensure periodic

custody reviews for post-order cases and

consistency in decision-making. Since

the Service is developing a specialized,

ongoing administrative review process

for these custody determinations, this

rule would eliminate the appellate role

of the Board of Immigration Appeals in

post-final order custody determinations.

This rule also would amend the

Service’s regulations to reflect the

authority of the Commissioner, and

through her, other designated Service

officials, to release certain aliens from

Service custody, issue orders of

supervision, and grant stays of removal.

DATES: Written comments must be

submitted on or before July 31, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Please submit written

comments, in triplicate, to the Director,

Policy Directives and Instructions

Branch, Immigration and Naturalization

Service, 425 I Street, NW, Room 5307,

Washington, DC 20536. To ensure

proper handling, please reference INS

No. 2029–00 on your correspondence.

Comments are available for public

inspection at the above address by

calling (202) 514–3048 to arrange for an

appointment.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joan

S. Lieberman, Office of the General

Counsel, Immigration and

Naturalization Service, 425 I Street NW,

Room 6100, Washington, DC 20536,

telephone (202) 514–2895 (not a toll-free

call).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Why is the Service Issuing This

Proposed Rule?

Congress has progressively acted to

restrict the release into the community

of aliens convicted of certain crimes,

beginning with amendments affecting

aggravated felons in the Anti-Drug

Abuse Act of 1988, Pub. L. 100–690, and

the Immigration Act of 1990, Public Law

101–649. Congress extended these

restrictions to other categories of crimes

in the Antiterrorism and Effective Death

Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. 104–132

and the Illegal Immigration Reform and

Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996,

Pub. L. 104–208. Under prior law,

criminal aliens who were referred to as

deportable under former section 242 of

the Immigration and Nationality Act

(Act) generally could only be detained

for a period of 6 months pending

removal after the issuance of a final

deportation order. This restriction has

been removed. Pursuant to section

241(a)(6) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1231(a)(6),

certain classes of aliens may be detained

in the discretion of the Attorney General

beyond the 90-day removal period,

including aliens that the Attorney

General determines constitute a risk to

the community or are unlikely to

comply with the order of removal.

As a result of this change in the law

and other factors, there has been a

considerable increase in the number of

aliens in immigration custody who have

a final order of removal but who the

Service is unable to remove during the

removal period set out in section

241(a)(1) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1231(a)(1).

Two courts of appeals have upheld

the Attorney General’s authority to

continue detention after the removal

period. See Duy Dac Ho v. Greene, 204

F.3d 1045 (10th Cir. 2000); Zadvydas v.

Underdown, 185 F.3d 279 (5th Cir.

1999). The Ninth Circuit recently held,

in Ma v. Reno,—F.3d —, 2000 WL

358445 (9th Cir. Apr. 10, 2000), that

such detention may not be extended

more than a reasonable time beyond the

statutory removal period, but the

Department of Justice is seeking further

review of that decision. This rule will

provide procedures to govern detention

of aliens with final orders, to the extent

that they continue to be detained after

the expiration of the removal period.

The Department of Justice has

determined that a separate custody

review process is appropriate for aliens

who are detained beyond the 90-day

removal period. This action permits a

comprehensive and fair review of postorder cases by establishing multiple

levels of review to determine whether

certain detained aliens may be released

from custody, and sets forth the

procedures governing such release or

continued detention. As was the case

with the implementation of the Mariel

Cuban Review Plan, this review process

is intended to balance the need to

protect the American public from

potentially dangerous aliens who

remain in the United States contrary to

law with the humanitarian problems

created by another country’s unjustified

delay or refusal to accept repatriation of

its nationals.

Currently, 8 CFR 241.4 provides the

general procedures governing the

detention of criminal, inadmissible, and

other aliens who have received a final

administrative removal order but whose

departure has not been effected within

the 90-day removal period specified in

section 241(a)(1) of the Act, 8 U.S.C.

1231(a)(1). In 1999, pending

promulgation of more specific

procedures by regulation and to

institute a more uniform process

nationwide, the Service issued a series

of memoranda to provide specific

guidance to field offices concerning

implementation of interim procedures

governing post-order custody cases.

Detention Procedures for Aliens Whose

Immediate Repatriation is Not Possible

or Practicable, February 3, 1999;

Supplemental Detention Procedures,

April 30, 1999; Interim Changes and

Instructions for Conduct of Post-Order

Custody Reviews, August 6, 1999

(collectively ‘‘the Pearson

memoranda’’).

This rule establishes permanent

procedures for post-order custody

reviews. The rule will assist the

decision maker in determining whether

an alien is an appropriate candidate for

release from custody after the expiration

of the removal period. When the review

procedures are adopted in final form,

they will supersede the Pearson

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 127 / Friday, June 30, 2000 / Proposed Rules 40541

memoranda. The new procedures are

modeled after those governing the

Mariel Cubans at 8 CFR 212.12 and

consist of a file review with the

opportunity for a panel interview and

recommendation, and a final decision

by a separate Service Headquarters unit,

the Headquarters Post-Order Detention

Unit (HQPDU). Although Mariel Cuban

procedures will continue to be governed

separately, the review process is similar

for both groups of aliens.

Who is Covered Under This Proposed

Rule?

This proposed rule would establish a

permanent review procedure that would

apply to noncriminal aliens as well as

inadmissible and criminal aliens whose

release after expiration of the 90-day

removal period presents a significant

risk of noncompliance with the order of

removal or a danger to public safety.

The Attorney General is authorized to

detain these aliens beyond the removal

period, as necessary, consistent with

section 241(a)(6) of the Act, 8 U.S.C.

1231(a)(6), until they can be removed

from the United States.

This permanent review procedure

will govern all post-order custody

reviews with the exception of Mariel

Cubans whose parole under section

212(d)(5) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5),

is governed by the provisions of 8 CFR

212.12. Mariel Cuban custody reviews

will continue to be conducted pursuant

to those provisions.

What Are the Proposed Procedures for

Post-Order Custody Reviews?

Under the proposed rule, the district

director maintains the responsibility for

the initial custody review when the

alien’s immediate repatriation is proper

but not practicable at the expiration of

the removal period. For the initial postorder custody review at the expiration

of the removal period (the 90-day

custody review), the district director

will conduct a file review. In most

cases, it will be unnecessary for the

district director to undertake a personal

interview since the alien’s immigration

proceedings have recently concluded,

and the information of record is recent.

The district director has the discretion

to conduct a personal or telephonic

interview if he or she finds that it will

assist him or her in making a custody

determination. Further, the alien will be

provided with the opportunity to

present any relevant written information

the alien desires in support of his or her

release into the community.

After the 90-day custody review, the

district director will notify the alien in

writing that he or she is to be released

from custody, or that the alien will be

continued in detention pending

repatriation or further review of his or

her custody status.

Where the district director has

notified the alien that he or she will

continue to be detained pending

repatriation, the district director’s

authority to reconsider an alien’s

custody status may be extended for an

additional period of up to 3 months

after expiration of the removal period.

The additional 3-month period will

allow the district director to continue

efforts to obtain the necessary travel

documents to effect the alien’s removal

before the detention authority is

transferred to Service Headquarters.

During the additional 3-month period,

the alien may submit a written request

to the district director for further review

of his or her custody status. The district

director shall consider information that

the alien submits in support of his or

her release from detention

demonstrating a material change in

circumstances. The district director will

provide a written response as

appropriate to the alien’s submission of

such new information and may, in the

exercise of discretion, conduct any

further review of the alien’s custody

status that he or she deems appropriate.

The district director retains the

authority to release the alien during this

period as well.

If the alien has not been repatriated or

released, detention authority transfers to

the newly designated Service

component, the HQPDU, under the

authority of the Executive Associate

Commissioner, Field Operations

(Executive Associate Commissioner),

either at the end of the 90-day removal

period or at the expiration of the 3-

month extension period. Under either

circumstance, the HQPDU will

ordinarily commence a custody review

within 30 days of the transfer of

detention authority or as soon as

possible thereafter should unforeseen or

emergent circumstances arise. The alien

will receive written notice of the

custody review approximately 30 days

prior to the scheduled review. The

HQPDU will conduct all further custody

determinations as long as the alien

remains in custody pending removal.

Subsequent custody reviews will be

conducted at annual intervals (or more

frequently in the sole discretion of the

HQPDU).

When the detention authority

transfers to the HQPDU, that unit will

conduct a file review for each alien

previously ordered detained by the

district director. If the file review does

not result in a release decision, the alien

will be given the opportunity for a panel

interview. The two-member panel will

be chosen from professional staff of the

Service. The interview will be

conducted in person and a translator

will be provided if the Service official

determines that a translator’s assistance

is appropriate. As under the Mariel

Cuban Review Plan, the interviewing

panel will make a custody

recommendation to the HQPDU. Upon

receipt of the panel’s recommendation,

the HQPDU shall determine whether to

detain or grant release consistent with

the delegation of discretionary

authority. The decision of the HQPDU

will be final and will not be subject to

further administrative review.

The HQPDU is not bound by the

panel’s recommendation. The HQPDU

retains full statutory authority for

custody determinations under sections

241(a)(6), 8 U.S.C. 1231(a)(6), and (for

inadmissible aliens) 212(d)(5) of the

Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5). The panel’s

recommendation is designed to serve as

an important guide to the exercise of

discretion for the HQPDU, but the

decision maker must be free to assess all

of the circumstances in arriving at a

final custody determination. The

decision maker must also take into

consideration changes in foreign and

domestic affairs, the availability of fiscal

resources, public policy and

humanitarian concerns, and other

factors that could weigh for or against

the decision in an individual case.

The subsequent HQPDU periodic

review, to be conducted within one year

of a refusal to grant release under these

procedures or as soon as practicable

thereafter in case of unforeseen

circumstances or an emergent situation,

will address whether the alien can be

released into the community if the alien

has not been repatriated since the last

review. The HQPDU may conduct a

custody review at more frequent

intervals at its sole discretion and

consider written submissions

demonstrating any material change in

circumstances that supports the alien’s

release during the interval between

reviews. Material change does not

include mere disagreement with the

decision denying release. The HQPDU

will give a written response to the

alien’s submission of new information

as appropriate under the rule. Written

submissions, whether to the district

director or the HQPDU, must be in

English or they may not be given

consideration.

The alien may be assisted by a person

of his or her choice in preparing or

submitting information in response to

the notice of custody review. The

Service has followed the guidelines set

forth in 8 CFR 212.12(d)(4)(ii) (regarding

representation of an alien before a

40542 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 127 / Friday, June 30, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Mariel Cuban parole panel) rather than

the more formal rules regarding attorney

representatives at 8 CFR 292.1. Both 8

CFR 212.12 and the proposed rule allow

the alien to be accompanied by a person

of his or her choice at the panel

interview (subject to the discretion of

the institution and panel). It may be

difficult for the detained alien to secure

the services of a licensed attorney for

each annual review, or counsel may

change between reviews. Further, giving

the alien discretion in selecting who

will assist him or her in preparation of

materials for submission to the district

director and who will accompany him

or her to the panel proceeding promotes

two important Service objectives. These

objectives are to make this process as

flexible and nonadversarial as possible

and to promote the alien’s level of

comfort with the proceedings. The

alien’s representative will be required to

complete an INS Form G–28 (Notice of

Entry of Appearance as Attorney or

Representative) at the time of the

interview or prior to reviewing the

detainee’s records. Attached to any

notice of a file review or interview, the

Service will provide a list of free or low

cost attorneys and representatives who

are located near the alien’s place of

confinement.

Although the Service will forward any

notice or decision relating to the

custody review to counsel or other

representative of record through regular

mail, the alien bears primary

responsibility for ensuring that the

individual providing assistance to him

or her is aware of any notices, decisions,

or other documentation relating to the

custody review. Experience with the

Cuban Review Plan has demonstrated

that an alien may have several

representatives successively, or may be

assisted by an attorney, other person, or

organization whose representation is not

known to the Service.

Any person assisting the alien should

not answer for the alien but assist the

alien in the latter’s presentation of

information supporting a release

decision. Whether the alien’s case is

before the district director for review or

the panel for an interview, the purpose

of the review process is to collect

information. Because the decision

maker must evaluate the suitability of

the alien for release, it is important for

the alien to address the district director

or panel directly and be able to speak

freely. The district director and panel

need to hear from the alien rather than

his or her representative.

Both the Executive Associate

Commissioner through the HQPDU and

the district director have the authority

to withdraw approval for release and to

revoke release or parole in the exercise

of discretion. Reasons for withdrawal of

approval for release or revocation

include the Service’s ability to obtain a

travel document and remove the alien,

the alien’s adverse conduct while

awaiting release, the decision maker’s

belief that the alien’s actions while in

the community pose a threat to public

safety, or any other circumstance that

indicates that release would no longer

be appropriate. If the decision maker

withdraws release approval or revokes

the alien’s release or parole, the alien

will receive written notification

specifying the reasons for the

withdrawal of approval for release or

revocation of post-order release or

parole.

This rule addresses Service

procedures for conducting post-order

custody reviews. It does not

circumscribe the exercise of the

Commissioner’s authority to direct

otherwise, as appropriate. Section 2.1.

of title 8 of the Code of Federal

Regulations delegates the authority

vested with the Attorney General to the

Commissioner. Section 241(a)(3) of the

Act vests authority with the Attorney

General to promulgate regulations

governing supervision of aliens beyond

the removal period and section 241(c)(2)

vests authority with the Attorney

General to grant stays of removal.

Therefore, the Commissioner already

has the authority to release certain

aliens from Service custody, issue

orders of supervision, and grant stays of

removal. As directed by the

Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner,

Service officials have authority to

release certain aliens from Service

custody, issue orders of supervision,

and grant stays of removal. Therefore,

this rule also amends 8 CFR 241.4, 241.5

and 241.6 to reflect the concurrent

authority of the Commissioner and other

designated Service officials.

What Other Changes Would This Rule

Make?

This rule would terminate the existing

procedure of appeal to the Board of

Immigration Appeals (Board) under 8

CFR 236.1 for an alien who receives an

unfavorable custody decision from the

district director. See Matter of Saelee,

Interim Decision 3427 (BIA 2000). Since

these aliens have final orders of

removal, all legal issues involving

removability (and any discretionary

relief from removal, if available) have

been resolved through the Executive

Office for Immigration Review or

through alternate procedures. Custody

determinations at this stage of the

process involve separate and distinct

issues, and the Service has the

knowledge and expertise required to

make these custody decisions.

The proposed rule for permanent

procedures provides for an automatic

multi-tiered annual review process

subsequent to the district director’s 90-

day review as long as the alien remains

in custody. The detainee is assured a

periodic and thorough review that does

not depend on the alien’s request for a

custody review or the filing of an

appeal, but is required at regular

intervals by regulation. This review

process will ensure timely, scheduled

reviews of each alien’s case.

Accordingly, in order to implement a

single comprehensive review process for

post-order custody cases, this proposed

rule removes all references to post-order

detention from 8 CFR 236.1. As revised,

8 CFR 236.1 would govern detention

issues only for aliens who have not yet

received a final removal order.

Any case pending before the Board on

the effective date of this rule when it is

published as a final rule will be

completed by the Board. Should the

alien decide to withdraw his or her

appeal, the Service shall continue to

conduct custody reviews under the

provisions of this rule.

This proposed regulation also

removes 8 CFR 212.13 and any

references to that section in 8 CFR 212.5

and 8 CFR 212.12. Section 212.13

established a single Departmental parole

review for all excludable Mariel Cubans

who on the effective date of the

regulation were detained by virtue of

the Attorney General’s authority under

the Act and whose parole had been

denied after the exhaustion of the

review procedures of 8 CFR 212.12. The

Departmental Review Panels have

completed the review of the cases of

detainees eligible for such review. Thus,

there is no longer a need for this

regulation. This action will not

otherwise affect the Cuban Review Plan

set forth in 8 CFR 212.12.

What Must the Alien Demonstrate to

Show His or Her Suitability for

Release?

The alien must be able to show to the

satisfaction of the decision maker that

he or she does not constitute a danger

to public safety or a flight risk pursuant

to the criteria set forth in the proposed

regulation.

If a Travel Document Can Be Obtained,

How Is the Custody Review Process

Affected?

Detention or release of aliens with a

final order of removal is tied to the

Service’s mission to enforce the

immigration laws and protect the

interests of the United States, pending

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 127 / Friday, June 30, 2000 / Proposed Rules 40543

the aliens’ eventual removal from the

United States. Accordingly, district

directors will continue to make efforts

to obtain travel documents even after

review authority has transferred to the

HQPDU. Headquarters Detention and

Deportation, Office of Field Operations

will also assist in the effort to secure

travel documents.

The ability to secure a travel

document by itself supports a decision

to continue detention pending the

removal of the alien and obviates the

need for further custody review because

it means the alien can be deported. See

8 CFR 212.12(g)(1). Custody reviews

may be pretermitted in the case of an

alien for whom travel documents are

available. Pending litigation, an

administrative or judicial stay, or other

barrier to removal does not entitle an

alien who can be repatriated to release

within the United States pending

resolution of the underlying action or

event. Aliens whose removal is deferred

under 8 CFR 208.17 may be considered

for release.

Will There Be Special Release

Conditions Under the Proposed Rule

and Will Work Authorization Be

Granted?

Release conditions and work

authorization for aliens subject to a final

order of removal will continue to be

governed by 8 CFR 241.5. The district

director or HQPDU may wish to impose

conditions, in addition to those

enumerated by regulation, such as that

the alien obey all laws, not associate

with any persons involved in criminal

activity, not associate with anyone

convicted of a felony without

permission, not carry firearms or other

dangerous weapons, or such other

conditions as the decision-maker deems

appropriate. Under 8 CFR 241.5(c), a

grant of work authorization is

discretionary but requires the decision

maker to make an initial finding that the

alien cannot be immediately removed

because no country will accept the alien

or that the alien’s removal is

impracticable or contrary to the public

interest.

Sponsorship and evidence of financial

support may be required as a precursor

to release under the proposed rule. The

Service has determined that appropriate

sponsorship is in the best interest of the

alien and community when an alien is

approved for release pending

repatriation. See, e.g., Fernandez-Roque

v. Smith, 734 F. 2d 576 (11th Cir. 1984).

Although the Service reserves the

authority to impose conditions of

release, including appropriate

sponsorship, this rule does not compel

the Government to tailor existing

programs to the needs of individual

aliens or to create or fund additional

programs if suitable sponsorship is not

located or available for an alien.

If an alien is detained in a facility that

does not provide any rehabilitative

programs, no negative inference

respecting release will be drawn against

the alien in making a custody

determination based on the fact that the

alien did not participate in such

programs. However, if the facility has

such programs available to the alien but

the alien refuses to participate, that fact

may be considered by the decisionmaker.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Attorney General, in accordance

with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 605(b)), has reviewed this

regulation and, by approving it, certifies

that this rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. This rule

would provide a more uniform review

process governing the detention of

criminal, inadmissible, and other aliens

who have received a final

administrative removal order but whose

departure has not been effected within

the 90-day removal period. This rule

does not affect small entities as that

term is defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).

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 251 of the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement Act of

1996. 5 U.S.C. 804. 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 foreignbased companies in domestic and

export markets.

Executive Order 12866

This rule is considered by the

Department of Justice, to be a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866, section 3(f),

Regulatory Planning and Review.

Accordingly, this rule has been

submitted to the Office of Management

and Budget for review.

Executive Order 13132

This regulation will not have

substantial direct effects on the States,

on the relationship between the

National Government and the States, or

on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government. Therefore, in

accordance with section 6 of Executive

Order 13132, it is determined that this

rule does not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a federalism summary impact

statement.

Executive Order 12988

This rule meets the applicable

standards set forth in sections 3(a) and

3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil

Justice Reform.

List of Subjects

8 CFR Part 212

Administrative practice and

procedure, Aliens, Immigration,

Passports and visas, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

8 CFR Part 236

Administrative practice and

procedure, Aliens, Immigration.

8 CFR Part 241

Administrative practice and

procedure, Aliens, Immigration.

Accordingly, chapter I of title 8 of the

Code of Federal Regulations is proposed

to be amended as follows:

PART 212—DOCUMENTARY

REQUIREMENTS: NONIMMIGRANTS;

WAIVERS; ADMISSION OF CERTAIN

INADMISSIBLE ALIENS; PAROLE

1. The authority citation for part 212

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1102, 1103, 1182,

1184, 1187, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1228, 1252, 8

CFR part 2.

§ 212.5 [Amended]

2. Section 212.5(f) is amended by

revising the phrase ‘‘§§ 212.12 and

212.13’’ to read ‘‘§ 212.12.;’’

§ 212.12 [Amended]

3. Section 212.12 is amended by:

a. In paragraph (b) introductory text,

revising the phrase ‘‘Except as provided

in § 212.13, the authority’’ to read ‘‘The

authority;’’ and by

b. In paragraph (g)(2), removing the

word ‘‘either’’ and removing the phrase

‘‘or § 212.13, whichever is later.’’

40544 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 127 / Friday, June 30, 2000 / Proposed Rules

§ 212.13 [Removed]

4. Remove § 212.13.

PART 236—APPREHENSION AND

DETENTION OF INADMISSIBLE AND

DEPORTABLE ALIENS; REMOVAL OF

ALIENS ORDERED REMOVED

5. The authority citation for part 236

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1182, 1224, 1225,

1226, 1227, 1362; sec. 303(b) of Div. C of Pub.

L. No. 104–208; 8 CFR part 2.

6. Section 236.1 is amended by:

a. Removing the last sentence in

paragraph (d)(1);

b. Revising paragraph (d)(2); and by

c. Removing paragraph (d)(3)(iii), to

read as follows:

§ 236.1 Apprehension, custody, and

detention.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

(2) Application to the district director.

After expiration of the 7-day period in

paragraph (d)(1) of this section, the

respondent may request review by the

district director of the conditions of his

or her release.

* * * * *

PART 241—APPREHENSION AND

DETENTION OF ALIENS ORDERED

REMOVED

7. The authority citation for part 241

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1223, 1227, 1251,

1253, 1255, and 1330; 8 CFR part 2.

8. Section 241.4 is revised to read as

follows:

§ 241.4 Continued detention of

inadmissible, criminal, and other aliens

beyond the removal period.

(a) Scope. The authority to continue

an alien in custody or grant release or

parole under sections 241(a)(6) and

212(d)(5)(A) of the Act shall be

exercised by the Commissioner or

Deputy Commissioner, as follows:

Except as otherwise directed by the

Commissioner or her designee, the

Executive Associate Commissioner

Field Operations or the district director

may continue an alien in custody

beyond the removal period described in

section 241(a)(1) of the Act pursuant to

the procedures described in this section.

Except as provided in paragraph (b)(2)

of this section, the provisions of this

section apply to custody determinations

for the following groups of aliens:

(1) An alien who is inadmissible

under section 212 of the Act, including

an excludable alien convicted of one or

more aggravated felony offenses and

subject to the provisions of section

501(b) of the Immigration Act of 1990,

Public Law 101–649 (codified at 8

U.S.C. 1226(e)(1) through (3)(1994));

(2) An alien who is removable under

section 237(a)(1)(C) of the Act;

(3) An alien who is removable under

sections 237(a)(2) or 237(a)(4) of the Act,

including deportable criminal aliens

whose cases are governed by former

section 242 of the Act prior to

amendment by the Illegal Immigration

Reform and Immigrant Responsibility

Act of 1996, Public Law 104–208, Div.

C; and

(4) An alien who is removable under

any other section of the Act, including

an alien granted withholding or deferral

of removal under 8 CFR part 208, may

be detained beyond the removal period

if the decision maker determines that

the alien is unlikely to comply with the

removal order or is a risk to the

community.

(b) Applicability to particular aliens—

(1) Motions to reopen. An alien who has

filed a motion to reopen immigration

proceedings for consideration of relief

from removal, including withholding or

deferral of removal pursuant to 8 CFR

208.16 or 208.17, shall remain subject to

the provisions of this section unless the

motion to reopen is granted. Section 236

of the Act and 8 CFR 236.1 govern

custody determinations for aliens who

are in pending immigration proceedings

before the Executive Office for

Immigration Review.

(2) Parole for certain Cuban nationals.

The review procedures in this section

do not apply to any Mariel Cuban who

is being detained by the Service pending

an exclusion or removal proceeding, or

pending his or her return to Cuba or

removal to another country. Instead, the

determination whether to release on

parole, or to revoke such parole, or to

detain, shall in the case of a Mariel

Cuban be governed by the procedures in

8 CFR 212.12.

(c) Delegation of authority. The

Attorney General’s statutory authority to

make custody determinations under

sections 241(a)(6) and 212(d)(5)(A) of

the Act when there is a final order of

removal, is delegated as follows:

(1) District directors. The initial

custody determination described in

paragraph (h) of this section and any

further custody determination

concluded in the 3-month period

immediately following expiration of the

90-day removal period, subject to the

provisions of paragraph (c)(2) of this

section, will be made by the district

director having jurisdiction over the

alien. The district director shall

maintain appropriate files respecting

each detained alien reviewed for

possible release, and shall have

authority to determine the order in

which the cases shall be reviewed, and

to coordinate activities associated with

these reviews in his or her respective

district.

(2) Headquarters Post-Order

Detention Unit (HQPDU). For any alien

the district director refers for further

review after the 90-day removal period,

or any alien who has not been released

or repatriated by the expiration of the 3-

month period after the 90-day review,

all further custody determinations will

be made by the Executive Associate

Commissioner, acting through the

HQPDU.

(3) The HQPDU review plan. The

Executive Associate Commissioner shall

appoint a Director of the HQPDU. The

Director of the HQPDU shall have

authority to establish and maintain

appropriate files respecting each

detained alien to be reviewed for

possible release, to determine the order

in which the cases shall be reviewed,

and to coordinate activities associated

with these reviews.

(4) Additional delegation of authority.

All references to the Executive

Associate Commissioner and district

director in this section shall be deemed

to include any person or persons

(including a committee) designated in

writing by the district director or

Executive Associate Commissioner to

exercise powers under this section.

(d) Custody determinations. A copy of

any decision by the district director or

Executive Associate Commissioner to

release or to detain an alien shall be

provided to the detained alien. A

decision to retain custody shall briefly

set forth the reasons for the continued

detention. A decision to release may

contain such special conditions as are

considered appropriate in the opinion of

the Service. Notwithstanding any other

provisions of this section, there is no

appeal from the district director’s or the

Executive Associate Commissioner’s

decision.

(1) Showing by the alien. The district

director or the Executive Associate

Commissioner may release an alien if

the alien demonstrates to the

satisfaction of the Attorney General or

her designee that his or her release will

not pose a danger to the community or

to the safety of other persons or to

property or a significant risk of flight

pending such alien’s removal from the

United States. The district director or

the Executive Associate Commissioner

may also, in accordance with the

procedures and consideration of the

factors set forth in this section, continue

in custody any alien described in

paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) of this section.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 127 / Friday, June 30, 2000 / Proposed Rules 40545

(2) Service of decision and other

documents. All notices, decisions, or

other documents in connection with the

custody reviews conducted under this

section by the district director or

Executive Associate Commissioner shall

be served on the alien, in accordance

with 8 CFR 103.5a, by the Service

district office having jurisdiction over

the alien. Release documentation

(including employment authorization if

appropriate) shall be issued by the

district office having jurisdiction over

the alien in accordance with the custody

determination made by the district

director or by the Executive Associate

Commissioner. Copies of all such

documents will be retained in the

alien’s record and forwarded to the

HQPDU.

(3) Alien’s representative. The alien’s

representative is required to complete

an INS Form G–28, Notice of Entry of

Appearance as Attorney or

Representative, at the time of the

interview or prior to reviewing the

detainee’s records. The Service will

forward by regular mail a copy of any

notice or decision that is being served

on the alien only to the attorney or

representative of record. The alien

remains responsible for notification to

any other individual providing

assistance to him or her.

(e) Criteria for release. Before making

any recommendation or decision to

release a detainee, a majority of the

Review Panel members, or the Director

of the HQPDU in the case of a record

review, must conclude that:

(1) Travel documents for the alien are

not available or, in the opinion of the

Service, immediate removal, while

proper, is otherwise not practicable or

not in the public interest;

(2) The detainee is presently a nonviolent person;

(3) The detainee is likely to remain

nonviolent;

(4) The detainee is not likely to pose

a threat to the community following his

or her release;

(5) The detainee is not likely to

violate the conditions of his or her

release; and (6) The detainee does not

pose a significant flight risk.

(f) Factors for consideration. The

following factors should be weighed in

considering whether to recommend

further detention or release of a

detainee:

(1) The nature and number of

disciplinary infractions or incident

reports received when incarcerated or

while in Service custody;

(2) The detainee’s criminal conduct

and criminal convictions, including

consideration of the nature and severity

of the alien’s convictions, sentences

imposed and time actually served,

probation and criminal parole history,

evidence of recidivism, and other

criminal history;

(3) Any available psychiatric and

psychological reports pertaining to the

detainee’s mental health;

(4) Evidence of rehabilitation

including institutional progress relating

to participation in work, educational,

and vocational programs, where

available;

(5) Favorable factors, including ties to

the United States such as the number of

close relatives residing here lawfully;

(6) Prior immigration violations and

history;

(7) The likelihood that the alien is a

significant flight risk or may abscond to

avoid removal, including history of

escapes, failures to appear for judicial or

other proceedings, absence without

leave from any halfway house or

sponsorship program, and other

defaults; and

(8) Any other information that is

probative of whether the alien is likely

to adjust to life in a community, is likely

to engage in future acts of violence, is

likely to engage in future criminal

activity, is likely to pose a danger to the

safety of himself or herself or to other

persons or to property, or is likely to

violate the conditions of his or her

release from immigration custody

pending removal from the United States.

(g) Travel documents and docket

control for aliens continued in detention

beyond the removal period—(1) In

general. The district director shall

continue to undertake appropriate steps

to secure travel documents for the alien

both before and after the expiration of

the removal period. If the district

director is unable to secure travel

documents within the removal period,

he or she shall apply for assistance from

Headquarters Detention and

Deportation, Office of Field Operations.

The district director shall promptly

advise the HQPDU Director when travel

documents are obtained for an alien

whose custody is subject to review by

the HQPDU. The Service’s

determination that receipt of a travel

document is likely may by itself warrant

continuation of detention pending the

removal of the alien from the United

States.

(2) Availability of travel document. In

making a custody determination, the

district director and the Director of the

HQPDU shall consider the ability to

obtain a travel document for the alien.

If it is established at any stage of a

custody review that, in the judgment of

the Service, travel documents can be

obtained, or such document is

forthcoming, the alien will not be

released unless immediate removal is

not practicable or in the public interest.

(3) Removal. The Service will not

conduct a custody review under these

procedures when the Service notifies

the alien that it is ready to execute an

order of removal.

(4) Alien’s cooperation. Release will

be denied in accordance with section

241(a)(1)(C) of the Act if the alien fails

or refuses to cooperate in the process of

obtaining a travel document.

(h) District director’s custody review

procedures. The district director’s

custody determination will be

developed in accordance with the

following procedures:

(1) Record review. The district

director will conduct the initial custody

review. For aliens described in

paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) of this section,

the district director will conduct a file

review prior to the expiration of the 90-

day removal period. This initial postorder custody review will consist of a

review of the alien’s records, and any

written information submitted in

English to the district director by or on

behalf of the alien. However, the district

director may in his or her discretion

schedule a personal or telephonic

interview with the alien as part of this

custody determination. The district

director may also consider any other

relevant information relating to the alien

or his or her circumstances and custody

status.

(2) Notice to alien. The district

director will provide written notice to

the detainee approximately 30 days in

advance of the pending record review so

that the alien may submit information in

writing in support of his or her release.

The alien may be assisted by a person

of his or her choice, subject to the

institution and panel’s discretion, in

preparing or submitting information in

response to the district director’s notice.

Such assistance shall be at no expense

to the Government. If the alien or his or

her representative requests additional

time to prepare materials beyond the

time when the district director expects

to conduct the file review, such a

request will constitute a waiver of the

requirement that the review occur prior

to the expiration of the removal period.

(3) Factors for consideration. The

district director’s review will include

but is not limited to consideration of the

factors described in paragraph (f) of this

section. Before making any decision to

release a detainee, the district director

must be able to reach the conclusions

set forth in paragraph (e) of this section.

(4) District director’s decision. The

district director will notify the alien in

writing that he or she is to be released

from custody, or that he or she will be

40546 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 127 / Friday, June 30, 2000 / Proposed Rules

continued in detention pending

repatriation or further review of his or

her custody status.

(5) District office staff. The district

director may delegate the authority to

conduct the custody review, develop

recommendations, or render the custody

or release decision to those persons

directly responsible for detention within

his or her district. This includes the

deputy district director, the assistant

director for detention and deportation,

the officer-in-charge of a detention

center, persons acting in such

capacities, or such other persons as the

district director may designate from the

professional staff of the Service.

(i) Determinations by the Executive

Associate Commissioner.

Determinations by the Executive

Associate Commissioner to release or

retain custody of aliens shall be

developed in accordance with the

following procedures.

(1) Review panels. The HQPDU

Director shall designate a panel or

panels to make recommendations to the

Executive Associate Commissioner. A

Review Panel shall, except as otherwise

provided, consist of two persons.

Members of a Review Panel shall be

selected from the professional staff of

the Service. All recommendations by

the two member Review Panel shall be

unanimous. If the vote of the twomember Review Panel is split, it shall

adjourn its deliberations concerning that

particular detainee until a third Review

Panel member is added. The third

member of any Review Panel shall be

the Director of the HQPDU or his or her

designee. A recommendation by a threemember Review Panel shall be by

majority vote.

(2) Record review. Initially, and at the

beginning of each subsequent review,

the HQPDU Director or a Review Panel

shall review the alien’s file. Upon

completion of this record review, the

HQPDU Director or the Review Panel

may issue a written recommendation

that the alien be released and reasons

therefore.

(3) Personal interview. (i) If the

HQPDU Director does not accept a

panel’s recommendation to grant release

after a record review, or if the alien is

not recommended for release, a Review

Panel shall personally interview the

detainee. The scheduling of such

interviews shall be at the discretion of

the HQPDU Director. The HQPDU

Director will provide a translator if he

or she determines that such assistance is

appropriate.

(ii) The alien may be accompanied

during the interview by a person of his

or her choice, subject to the institution’s

and the panel’s discretion, who is able

to attend at the time of the scheduled

interview. Such assistance shall be at no

expense to the Government. The alien

may submit to the Review Panel any

information, in English, that he or she

believes presents a basis for his or her

release.

(4) Alien’s participation. Every alien

shall respond to questions or provide

other information when requested to do

so by Service officials for the purpose of

carrying out the provisions of this rule.

(5) Panel recommendation. Following

completion of the interview and its

deliberations, the Review Panel shall

issue a written recommendation that the

alien be released or remain in custody

pending removal or further review. This

written recommendation shall include a

brief statement of the factors that the

Review Panel deems material to its

recommendation.

(6) Determination. The Executive

Associate Commissioner shall consider

the recommendation and appropriate

file material and issue a custody

determination, in the exercise of

discretion under the standards of this

section. The Executive Associate

Commissioner’s review will include but

is not limited to consideration of the

factors described in paragraph (f) of this

section. Before making any decision to

release a detainee, the Executive

Associate Commissioner must be able to

reach the conclusions set forth in

paragraph (e) of this section. The

Executive Associate Commissioner is

not bound by the panel’s

recommendation.

(j) Conditions of release—(1) In

general. The district director or

Executive Associate Commissioner may

in his or her discretion impose such

conditions or special conditions on

release as the Service considers

appropriate in an individual case or

cases, including but not limited to the

conditions of release noted in § 212.5(c)

of this chapter and § 241.5. An alien

released under this section must abide

by the release conditions specified by

the Service in relation to his or her

release or sponsorship.

(2) Sponsorship. The district director

or Executive Associate Commissioner

may, in the exercise of discretion,

condition release on placement with a

close relative who agrees to act as a

sponsor, such as a parent, spouse, child,

or sibling who is a lawful permanent

resident or a citizen of the United

States, or may condition release on the

alien’s placement or participation in an

approved halfway house, mental health

project, or community project when, in

the opinion of the Service, such

condition is warranted. No detainee

may be released until sponsorship,

housing, or other placement has been

found for the detainee, if ordered,

including but not limited to evidence of

financial support.

(3) Employment authorization. The

district director and Executive Associate

Commissioner may in their discretion

grant employment authorization under

the same conditions set forth in

§ 241.5(c) for aliens released under an

order of supervision.

(4) Withdrawal of release approval.

The district director or Executive

Associate Commissioner may, in their

discretion, withdraw approval for

release of any detained alien prior to

release when, in the decision maker’s

opinion, the conduct of the detainee, or

any other circumstance, indicates that

release would no longer be appropriate.

(k) Timing of reviews. The timing of

reviews shall be in accordance with the

following guidelines:

(1) District director. (i) Prior to the

expiration of the 90-day removal period,

the district director shall conduct a

custody review for an alien described in

paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) of this section

where the alien’s removal, while proper,

cannot be accomplished because no

country will accept the alien, or removal

of the alien prior to expiration of the

removal period is impracticable or

contrary to the public interest. As

provided in paragraph (h)(4) of this

section, the district director will notify

the alien in writing that he or she is to

be released from custody, or that he or

she will be continued in detention

pending repatriation or further review of

his or her custody status.

(ii) When release is denied pending

the alien’s repatriation, the district

director in his or her discretion may

retain responsibility for custody

determinations for up to 3 months after

expiration of the 90-day removal period,

during which time the district director

may conduct such additional review of

the case as he or she deems appropriate.

The district director may release the

alien if he or she is not removed within

the 3-month period following the

expiration of the 90-day removal period,

in accordance with paragraphs (e), (f),

and (j) of this section, or the district

director may refer the alien to the

HQPDU for further custody review.

(2) HQPDU reviews—(i) District

director referral for further review.

When the district director refers a case

to the HQPDU for further review, as

provided in paragraph (c)(2) of this

section, authority over the custody

determination transfers to the Executive

Associate Commissioner, according to

procedures established by the HQPDU.

The Service will provide the alien with

approximately 30 days notice of this

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 127 / Friday, June 30, 2000 / Proposed Rules 40547

further review, which will ordinarily be

conducted by the expiration of the

removal period or as soon thereafter as

practicable.

(ii) District director retains

jurisdiction. When the district director

has advised the alien at the 90-day

review as provided in paragraph (h)(4)

of this section that he or she will remain

in custody pending repatriation, and the

alien is not removed within 3 months of

the district director’s decision, authority

over the custody determination transfers

from the district director to the

Executive Associate Commissioner. The

initial HQPDU review will ordinarily be

conducted at the expiration of the 3-

month period after the 90-day review or

as soon thereafter as practicable. The

Service will provide the alien with

approximately 30 days notice of that

review.

(iii) Continued detention cases. A

subsequent review shall ordinarily be

commenced for any detainee within

approximately one year of a refusal by

the Executive Associate Commissioner

to grant release. Not more than once

every three months in the interim

between annual reviews, the alien may

submit a written request to the HQPDU

for release consideration based on a

proper showing of a material change in

circumstances since the last annual

review. The HQPDU shall respond to

the alien’s request in writing within

approximately 90 days.

(iv) Review scheduling. Reviews will

be conducted within the time periods

specified in paragraphs (k)(1)(i),

(k)(2)(i), (k)(2)(ii), and (k)(2)(iii) of this

section or as soon as possible thereafter,

allowing for any unforeseen

circumstances or emergent situation.

(v) Discretionary reviews. The HQPDU

Director, in his or her discretion, may

schedule a review of a detainee at

shorter intervals when he or she deems

such review to be warranted.

(3) Postponement of review. In the

case of an alien who is in the custody

of the Service, the district director or the

HQPDU Director may, in his or her

discretion, suspend or postpone the

custody review process if such

detainee’s prompt deportation is

practicable and proper, or for other good

cause. The decision and reasons for the

delay shall be documented in the alien’s

file. Reasonable care will be exercised to

assure that the alien’s case is reviewed

once the reason for delay is remedied or

if the alien is not removed from the

United States as anticipated at the time

review was suspended or postponed.

(4) Transition provisions. (i) The

provisions of this section apply to cases

that have already received the 90-day

review. If the alien’s last review under

the procedures set out in the Executive

Associate Commissioner memoranda

entitled Detention Procedures for Aliens

Whose Immediate Repatriation is Not

Possible or Practicable, February 3,

1999; Supplemental Detention

Procedures, April 30, 1999; Interim

Changes and Instructions for Conduct of

Post-order Custody Reviews, August 6,

1999, was a file review and the alien

remains in custody, the HQPDU will

conduct a custody review within 6

months of that review. If the alien’s last

review included an interview, the

HQPDU review will be scheduled one

year from the last review. These reviews

will be conducted pursuant to the

procedures in paragraph (i) of this

section, within the time periods

specified in this paragraph or as soon as

possible thereafter, allowing for

resource limitations, unforeseen

circumstances, or an emergent situation.

(ii) Any case pending before the Board

on the effective date (after this rule is

published as a final rule) will be

completed by the Board. If the Board

affirms the district director’s decision to

continue the alien in detention, the next

scheduled custody review will be

conducted one year after the Board’s

decision in accordance with the

procedures in paragraph (i) of this

section.

(l) Revocation of release—(1)

Violation of conditions of release. Any

alien described in paragraphs (a) or

(b)(1) of this section who has been

released under an order of supervision

or other conditions of release who

violates the conditions of release may be

returned to custody. Any such alien

who violates the conditions of an order

of supervision is subject to the penalties

described in section 243(b) of the Act.

Upon revocation, the alien will be

notified of the reasons for revocation of

his or her release or parole.

(2) Determination by the Service. The

Executive Associate Commissioner shall

have authority, in the exercise of

discretion, to revoke release and return

to Service custody an alien previously

approved for release under the

procedures in this section. A district

director may also revoke release of an

alien when, in the district director’s

opinion, revocation is in the public

interest and circumstances do not

reasonably permit referral of the case to

the Executive Associate Commissioner.

Release may be revoked in the exercise

of discretion when, in the opinion of the

revoking official:

(i) The purposes of release have been

served;

(ii) The alien violates any condition of

release;

(iii) It is appropriate to enforce a

removal order or to commence removal

proceedings against an alien; or

(iv) The conduct of the detainee, or

any other circumstance, indicates that

release would no longer be appropriate.

(3) Timing of review when release is

revoked. The HQPDU Director shall

schedule the review process in the case

of an alien whose previous release or

parole from immigration custody

pursuant to a decision of either the

district director or the Executive

Associate Commissioner under the

procedures in this section has been or

is subject to being revoked. The normal

review process will commence with

notification to the alien of a file review

and scheduling of an interview, which

will ordinarily be expected to occur

within approximately 3 months after

release is revoked. Thereafter, custody

reviews will be conducted annually

under the provisions of paragraphs (i),

(j), and (k) of this section.

9. Section 241.5 is amended by

revising paragraph (a) introductory text

to read as follows:

§ 241.5 Conditions of release after removal

period.

(a) Order of supervision. An alien

released pursuant to § 241.4 shall be

released pursuant to an order of

supervision. The Commissioner, Deputy

Commissioner, Executive Associate

Commissioner Field Operations,

regional director, district director, acting

district director, deputy district director,

assistant district director for

investigations, assistant district director

for detention and deportation, or officerin-charge may issue Form I–220B, Order

of Supervision. The order shall specify

conditions of supervision including, but

not limited to, the following:

* * * * *

10. Section 241.6 is revised to read as

follows:

§ 241.6 Administrative stay of removal.

(a) Any request of an alien under a

final order of deportation or removal for

a stay of deportation or removal shall be

filed on Form I–246, Stay of Removal,

with the district director having

jurisdiction over the place where the

alien is at the time of filing. The

Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner,

Executive Associate Commissioner

Field Operations, regional director, or

district director, in his or her discretion

and in consideration of factors such as

are listed in § 212.5 of this chapter and

section 241(c) of the Act, may grant a

stay of removal or deportation for such

time and under such conditions as he or

she may deem appropriate. Neither the

request nor the failure to receive notice

40548 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 127 / Friday, June 30, 2000 / Proposed Rules

of disposition of the request shall delay

removal or relieve the alien from strict

compliance with any outstanding notice

to surrender for deportation or removal.

(b) Denial by the Commissioner,

Deputy Commissioner, Executive

Associate Commissioner Field

Operations, regional director, or district

director of a request for a stay is not

appealable, but such denial shall not

preclude an immigration judge or the

Board from granting a stay in

connection with a motion to reopen or

a motion to reconsider as provided in 8

CFR part 3.

(c) The Service shall take all

reasonable steps to comply with a stay

granted by an immigration judge or the

Board. However, such a stay shall cease

to have effect if granted (or

communicated) after the alien has been

placed aboard an aircraft or other

conveyance for removal and the normal

boarding has been completed.

Dated: June 23, 2000.

Janet Reno,

Attorney General.

[FR Doc. 00–16560 Filed 6–29–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–10–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Food Safety and Inspection Service

9 CFR Parts 317, 318, 319, 381

[Docket No. 97–036R]

Other Consumer Protection (OCP)

Activities—Reopening of Comment

Period

AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection

Service, USDA.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of

comment period.

SUMMARY: The Food Safety and

Inspection Service (FSIS) is reopening

the comment period for the advanced

notice of proposed rulemaking ‘‘Other

Consumer Protection (OCP) Activities’’

for 60 days. This action responds to a

request to allow additional time for

comments.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before August 29, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit one original and

two copies of written comments to: FSIS

Docket Clerk, Docket # 97–036R, Room

102, Cotton Annex Building, 300 12th

Street, SW, Washington, DC 20250–

3700. All comments received in

response to this notice will be

considered part of the public record and

will be available for viewing in the FSIS

Docket Room between 8:30 a.m. and

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. FSIS

has made a technical paper available in

the FSIS Docket Room and on the FSIS

homepage (www.fsis.usda.gov).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Daniel Engeljohn, Director, Regulations

Development and Analysis Division,

Food Safety and Inspection Service,

Washington, DC 20250–3700, at (202)

720–5627, fax number (202) 690–0486.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March

17, 2000, FSIS published the advanced

notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR)

‘‘Other Consumer Protection (OCP)

Activities’’ (65 FR 14486). FSIS

published this ANPR to request

comments on the need and desirability

of revising its approach to verifying that

meat and poultry products are not

misbranded, economically adulterated,

or otherwise unacceptable for reasons

that do not necessarily raise food safety

or public health concerns. In the ANPR,

FSIS referred to these program activities

as ‘‘other consumer protection’’ (OCP)

activities. The ANPR defined and

described FSIS’ OCP activities and

discussed the Agency’s need for revised

regulations and verification and

enforcement procedures.

FSIS has received a request to extend

the comment period for an additional

180 days because of the large scope of

the ANPR. FSIS agrees that the ANPR

addresses many issues and wants to

receive as much input as possible.

However, because this is an ANPR, and

any further actions by the Agency will

be issued in a notice and comment

proposed rulemaking, FSIS is reopening

the comment period for 60 days. After

the comment period closes, FSIS,

intends to proceed with development of

various OCP notice and comment

proposed rulemakings.

Additional Public Notification

Public awareness of all segments of

rulemaking and policy development is

important. Consequently, in an effort to

better ensure that minorities, women,

and persons with disabilities are aware

of this notice, FSIS will announce it and

provide copies of this Federal Register

publication in the FSIS Constituent

Update. FSIS provides a weekly FSIS

Constituent Update, which is

communicated via fax to over 300

organizations and individuals. In

addition, the update is available on line

through the FSIS web page located at

http://www.fsis.usda.gov. The update is

used to provide information regarding

FSIS policies, procedures, regulations,

Federal Register notices, FSIS public

meetings, recalls, and any other types of

information that could affect or would

be of interest to our constituents/

stakeholders. The constituent fax list

consists of industry, trade, and farm

groups, consumer interest groups, allied

health professionals, scientific

professionals, and other individuals that

have requested to be included. Through

these various channels, FSIS is able to

provide information to a much broader,

more diverse audience.

For more information and to be added

to the constituent fax list, fax your

request to the Congressional and Public

Affairs Office, at (202) 720–5704.

Done at Washington, DC on: June 22, 2000.

Thomas J. Billy,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 00–16520 Filed 6–29–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–DM–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

10 CFR Parts 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36,

39, 40, 50, 61, 70, 72, and 76

[Docket No. PRM–30–63]

Natural Resources Defense Council;

Receipt of Petition for Rulemaking

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; Notice

of receipt.

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) has received and

requests public comment on a petition

for rulemaking filed by the Natural

Resources Defense Council (NRDC). The

petition has been docketed by the

Commission and has been assigned

Docket No. PRM–30–63. The petitioner

requests that the NRC amend its

regulations to require that an individual

report illegal payments to regulators if

the individual has knowledge or

evidence of the illegal payments. The

petitioner requests that an individual

who fails to make such a report not be

issued a license or allowed to retain a

license.

DATES: Submit comments by September

13, 2000. Comments received after this

date will be considered if it is practical

to do so, but assurance of consideration

cannot be given except as to comments

received on or before this date.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to:

Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555.

Attention: Rulemakings and

Adjudications staff.

Deliver comments to 11555 Rockville

Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:30

am and 4:15 pm on Federal workdays.

For a copy of the petition, write to

David L. Meyer, Chief, Rules and