[Federal Register: November 17, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 220)]
[Rules and Regulations]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
20 CFR Part 655
Temporary Agricultural Employment of H-2A Aliens in the United
AGENCY: Employment and Training Administration, Department of Labor.
ACTION: Interim final rule; request for further comments.
SUMMARY: The Department of Labor (Department or DOL) is further
amending its regulations to extend the transition period of the
application filing procedures currently in effect for all H-2A
employers with a date of need before January 1, 2010, as established in
the H-2A Interim Final Rule (IFR) published on April 16, 2009. The
transition period is hereby extended to include all employers with a
date of need before June 1, 2010.
DATES: This IFR is effective on November 17, 2009. The grounds for
making the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register are
set forth in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. Interested
persons are invited to submit written comments on the IFR on or before
December 17, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Regulatory
Information Number (RIN) 1205-AB55, by any one of the following
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the
Web site instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Please submit all written comments (including disk and CD-ROM
submissions) to Thomas Dowd, Administrator, Office of Policy
Development and Research, Employment and Training Administration, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room N-5641,
Washington, DC 20210.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Please submit all comments to Thomas Dowd,
Administrator, Office of Policy Development and Research, Employment
and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Room N-5641, Washington, DC 20210.
Please submit your comments by only one method. Comments that are
received by the Department through means beyond those listed in this
IFR or that are received after the comment period has closed will not
be reviewed in consideration of the Final Rule. The Department will
post all comments received on http://www.regulations.gov without making
any change to the comments, including any personal information
provided. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is the Federal e-
Rulemaking portal and all comments posted there are available and
accessible to the public. The Department cautions commenters not to
include their personal information such as Social Security numbers,
personal addresses, telephone numbers, and e-mail addresses in their
comments as such submitted information will become viewable by the
public via the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. It is the
responsibility of the commenter to safeguard his or her information.
Comments submitted through http://www.regulations.gov will not include
the commenter's e-mail address unless the commenter chooses to include
that information as part of his or her comment. Postal delivery in
Washington, DC, may be delayed due to security concerns. Therefore, the
Department encourages the public to submit comments via the Web site
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to the Federal eRulemaking portal at http://
www.regulations.gov. The Department will also make all the comments it
receives available for public inspection during normal business hours
at the Employment and Training Administration (ETA) Office of Policy
Development and Research at the above address. If you need assistance
to review the comments, the Department will provide you with
appropriate aids such as readers or print magnifiers. The Department
will make copies of the rule available, upon request, in large print
and as an electronic file on a computer disk. The Department will
consider providing the proposed rule in other formats upon request. To
schedule an appointment to review the comments and/or obtain the rule
in an alternate format, contact the Office of Policy Development and
Research at (202) 693-3700 (VOICE) (this is not a toll-free number) or
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William L. Carlson, PhD,
Administrator, Office of Foreign Labor Certification, ETA, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room C-4312,
Washington, DC 20210; Telephone (202) 693-3010 (this is not a toll-free
number). Individuals with hearing or speech impairments may access the
telephone number above via TTY by calling the toll-free Federal
Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.
The H-2A temporary labor certification program has been operating
for over two decades, first under the Department's regulations
promulgated in the wake of Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986
(IRCA), primarily published at 52 FR 20507, Jun. 1, 1987 (``the 1987
Rule''), and now under new H-2A regulations published on December 18,
2008, 73 FR 77110 (the ``2008 Final Rule''). The 2008 Final Rule
reflected several significant policy shifts. Among other things, the
2008 Final Rule provided for a transition period to enable employers to
gradually change their process from recruitment and solicitation of
workers, both foreign and domestic, and to become accustomed to the
filing procedures delineated in the new regulations.
After the 2008 Final Rule was promulgated, a group of plaintiffs
comprised primarily of workers' rights organizations filed suit in the
United States (U.S.) District Court for the District of Columbia
challenging the 2008 Final Rule. United Farm Workers, et al. v. Chao,
et al., Civil No. 09-00062 RMU (D.DC). The plaintiffs requested that
the court issue a temporary restraining order and preliminary
injunction, along with a permanent injunction to prohibit the
Department from implementing the 2008 Final Rule. The plaintiffs'
requests for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction
were denied and the 2008 Final Rule went into effect as scheduled on
January 17, 2009.
As the Department began accepting applications under the transition
period procedures of the 2008 Final Rule, it became evident that the
Department and the State Workforce Agencies (SWAs) found it challenging
to effectively and efficiently implement the new regulations, resulting
in processing delays and confusion among staff and user communities.
Consequently, the new Administration undertook review of the prior
Administration's policy decisions on which the 2008 Final Rule was
based and in support of this review proposed to suspend the 2008 Final
Rule in a Notice of Proposed Suspension on March 17, 2009 at 74 FR
11408 for a period of 9 months during which it could fully reconsider
the 2008 Final Rule. In order to ensure a continuing and stable
regulatory process for workers, employers and other affected
stakeholders, the Department
published an IFR on April 16, 2009 to extend the 2008 Final Rule
transition period until January 1, 2010. 74 FR 17597, Apr. 16, 2009. On
May 29, 2009, the Department proceeded with the suspension and issued a
final rule to suspend the 2008 Final Rule and to reinstate the former
regulations for a 9-month period, after which time it would revert to
the 2008 Final Rule, unless a new rulemaking was in place. See, 74 FR
25972, May 29, 2009.
After the publication of the Final Suspension and Notice, the North
Carolina Growers Association and others (``NCGA'') filed a complaint in
the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina. NCGA
requested the court to enjoin the Department from suspending the 2008
Final Rule. North Carolina Growers' Association v. Solis, 1:09-cv-00411
(June 9, 2009). On June 29, the court granted NCGA's motion for a
preliminary injunction (North Carolina Growers' Association v. Solis,
1:09-cv-00411 (June 29, 2009)) thereby preventing implementation of the
Suspension. Therefore, the Final 2008 Rule remains in effect at this
During this period, the Department undertook its review of the 2008
Final Rule and determined that a number of elements of that rule are
not in keeping with the philosophy of the new Administration,
particularly with respect to avoiding adverse effect on the wages of
domestic workers. For those reasons, the Department determined that a
new rulemaking effort was required in the H-2A program, and on
September 4, 2009 published new proposed regulations revising title 20
of the Code of Federal Regulations (20 CFR), part 655, and title 29 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (29 CFR), part 501 (2009 H-2A NPRM). 74
FR 45906, Sept. 4, 2009.
II. The Need for Extending H-2A Transition Procedures
While the Department undertakes a full review of the comments it
receives in response to the publication of the 2009 H-2A NPRM, it has
concluded that it is necessary to again extend the transition
procedures of the 2008 Final Rule.
Fully implementing the 2008 Final Rule for dates of need on or
after January 1, 2010 would create significant confusion among program
users and create potentially serious operational challenges for both
the Department and the SWA staff, likely resulting in processing
delays. Under the 2008 Final Rule's current transition procedures at 20
CFR 655.100(b), employers who are filing applications for H-2A workers
with a date of need prior to January 1, 2010 are required to engage in
recruitment after filing the labor certification application. By
contrast, for applications with a date of need on or after January 1,
2010, the current 2008 Final Rule requires employers to commence
recruitment before the application is filed and no earlier than 75 days
prior to that date of need. Under the current 2008 Final Rule, the
earliest such date on which employers with a date of need on or after
January 1, 2010 could have begun their pre-filing recruitment was
October 18, 2009.
It is inevitable that there will eventually be a switch from the
transition procedure to either the fully implemented 2008 Final Rule or
a Final Rule arising from the 2009 H-2A NPRM. Unless the transition
provision is extended, there is a significant possibility that the SWAs
and the Department could be forced to operate simultaneously under
three different case processing regimes. Extending the transition
procedures to June 1 makes it more likely that there will be only one
switch rather than two. Furthermore, undertaking the full
implementation of the 2008 Final Rule would divert limited Department
resources and staff away from the imperative of processing applications
and providing employers with needed guidance.
For these reasons, it is necessary to again extend the transition
period procedures in 20 CFR 655.100(b)(2) for all employers with a date
of need prior to June 1, 2010. The Department expects to have either
issued a Final Rule arising from the 2009 H-2A NPRM or to have decided
not to engage in further rulemaking on the H-2A program by early 2010.
By extending the transition procedures, employers will be clearly
informed about which recruitment procedures they must use, either the
full final regulatory procedures of the 2008 Final Rule or the
procedures from a Final Rule arising from the 2009 H-2A NPRM.
III. Discussion of Comments Received in Connection With the April 16,
2009 Interim Final Rule Extending the Transition Period
After publishing an IFR on April 16, 2009, the Department received
five comments in response to the extension of the transition period.
Some of the comments in whole or in part addressed issues unrelated to
the extension of the transition period and/or related generally to the
then-proposed Suspension of the 2008 Final Rule or the substance of the
2008 Final Rule. The Department has classified one comment and portions
of other comments as outside the scope and did not consider them for
the purpose of the discussion below.
The Department received four comments expressing support for the
prior extension of the transition period. One commenter, a law firm
representing H-2A employers, expressed support for the decision to
continue the transition period procedures until ``at least January 1,
2010'' and longer. This commenter also addressed substantive aspects of
the 2008 Final Rule which the Department has determined to be out of
scope of this IFR. In addition, the commenter provided specific
suggestions for a deliberative process, beyond the notice and comment
rulemaking in which the Department is required to engage, which it
urged the Department to undertake before undertaking further changes to
the H-2A program. Although the Department appreciates the suggestions,
this discussion was also determined to be out of scope for the purpose
of the decision to extend the transition period.
Another commenter, representing an association of individual
ranchers engaged in the range production of livestock and sheepshearing
contractors, expressed support for the transition with one caveat; it
strongly opposed the requirement of multi-state advertising being
applied to its clients during the extended transition period.
There is no basis for exempting one group of employers from any of
the substantive requirements of the 2008 Final Rule. The INA
specifically requires the Department to protect the employment
opportunities of U.S. workers across the occupations encompassed by the
H-2A labor certification program, in particular by ensuring that the
employer makes positive recruitment efforts in a multi-state region in
accordance with the INA. The Department finds it necessary and
appropriate to extend the transition period procedures in their
entirety so that it may provide for a timely and orderly certification
process of H-2A applications during the period when it is considering
comments on the 2009 H-2A NPRM. Exempting a single subgroup from the
regulatory implementation of a statutory requirement would produce
substantial legal and operational difficulties. Therefore, the
Department has determined that it must maintain all the requirements of
the 2008 Final Rule as put into operation through the transition
procedures. The Department intends to continue the current practice
discussed in the 2008 Final Rule of having the Chicago National
Processing Center (NPC) advise employers of their
recruitment obligations and provide each with states of traditional or
expected labor supply for purposes of advertising. 73 FR 77113, Dec.
Another commenter responding to the extension of transition period
procedures was a SWA. The SWA expressed guarded support for the
Department's action, and indicated that ``although extending the
transition period minimizes uncertainty in the near future, it does not
alleviate our concerns [with respect to the 2008 Final Rule].''
The Department, although concerned about creating interim stability
for program users and workers, is also concerned with alleviating long-
term issues in the H-2A program and has thus begun a new rulemaking by
promulgating an NPRM. The Department expects that this SWA and other
interested entities will express their concerns by providing the
Department with substantive comments on the proposed changes to the H-
The Department also received a comment from a national advocacy
organization for migrant and seasonal farmworkers. This commenter
implied support for the extension of the transition period to ``prevent
administrative confusion and disruption'' but noted concerns about the
effect on the then-proposed Suspension as well as the process for the
designation of the labor supply States during the recruitment period.
The commenter urged DOL to ensure these designations take place in a
transparent and collaborative manner to notify U.S. workers of
potential work opportunities. In addition, the commenter urged DOL to
work with farmworker unions, community-based organizations and other
farmworker advocacy organizations to increase the likelihood that U.S.
workers will learn of H-2A job opportunities.
As part of the rulemaking process, the Department has given serious
thought to the effect the timing of the new rulemaking will have both
on employers using the H-2A program and on U.S. workers being recruited
in connection with H-2A applications. The Department has concluded that
keeping the transition provision in place will cause the least
disruption to program users as well as U.S. and H-2A workers. With
respect to the commenter's concern about the transparency of the labor
state designation process, the Department believes that the current
process followed by the NPC provides both transparency and adequate
notice to apprise U.S. workers of job opportunities so that it ought to
continue during the additional extension of the transition period.
Under the transition provisions of the 2008 Final Rule, the NPC has
a regulatory mandate to designate labor supply States on a case-by-case
basis during the transition period. 20 CFR 655.100(b)(2)(iv). To
implement this mandate the NPC has sought information from the SWAs or
other sources, including, if available, the success of recent efforts
by out-of-State employers to recruit in that State. In accordance with
its mandate, the NPC developed a matrix of traditional labor supply
States in consultation with several SWAs and based on traditional
patterns of labor supply from previous experience of the SWAs and the
NPC. In developing the matrix, the NPC took into account traditional
factors affecting the flow of agricultural labor supply, such as
weather patterns, crop distribution, and availability of
transportation. To ensure fairness and consistency in adjudication, the
matrix will continue to be applied to all H-2A applications through
instructions to employers upon the acceptance of the application and
the initiation of recruitment.
In terms of the commenter's suggestion that the Department engage
with various farmworker advocacy organizations to maximize the flow of
information to U.S. workers regarding H-2A job opportunities, the
Department recognizes the importance of keeping U.S. workers informed
about H-2A job opportunities during the recruitment period. The
Department may not impose new or additional requirements on employers
recruiting U.S. workers under the transition period procedures.
However, the Department expects that this farmworker advocate
organization provided comments based on its longstanding experience in
the context of the new H-2A rulemaking process.
The Department received no comments opposing the extension of the
IV. Administrative Information
A. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, the Department must determine
whether a regulatory action is significant and therefore subject to the
requirements of the E.O. and subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of the E.O. defines a
significant regulatory action as an action that is likely to result in
a rule (1) having an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or
more, or adversely and materially affecting a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities (also
referred to as economically significant); (2) creating serious
inconsistency or otherwise interfering with an action taken or planned
by another agency; (3) materially altering the budgetary impacts of
entitlement grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raising novel legal or policy
issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or
the principles set forth in the E.O. The Department has determined that
this IFR is not an economically significant regulatory action under
sec. 3(f)(1) of E.O.12866. The procedures for extending the time during
which employers seeking H-2A workers will file under the transition
procedures will not have an economic impact of $100 million or more.
The regulation will not adversely affect the economy or any sector
thereof, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, nor public
health or safety in a material way. The Department has also determined
that this IFR is not a significant regulatory action under sec. 3(f)(4)
of the E.O.
Summary of Impacts
The change in this IFR is expected to have little net direct cost
impact on employers above and beyond the baseline of the current costs
required by the program as it is currently implemented. Employer costs
for newspaper advertising for the conduct of positive recruitment in
traditional or expected labor supply States will not increase as a
result of this IFR.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
When an agency issues a rulemaking proposal, the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) requires that a regulatory flexibility analysis
be prepared and made available for public comment. The RFA must
describe the impact of the rule on small entities. See 5 U.S.C. 603(a).
Section 605 of the RFA allows an agency to certify a rule, in lieu of
preparing an analysis, if the rulemaking is not expected to have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The Deputy Assistant Secretary of ETA has notified the Chief Counsel
for Advocacy, Small Business Administration (SBA), and certifies under
the RFA at 5 U.S.C. 605(b), that this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The rule
does not substantively change existing obligations for employers who
choose to participate in the H-2A
temporary agricultural worker program. The factual basis for such a
certification is that even though this rule can and does affect small
entities, there are not a substantial number of small entities that
will be affected, nor is there a significant economic impact upon those
small entities that are affected. Of the total 2,204,792 farms in the
U.S., 98 percent have sales of less than $750,000 per year and fall
within SBA's definition of small entities. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2008,
the last year for which official numbers are available, only 8,096
employers filed requests for only 86,113 workers. That represents less
than 1 percent of all farms in the U.S. Even if all of the 8,096
employers who filed applications under H-2A in FY 2008 were small
entities, that is still a relatively small number of employers
affected, and this rule is expected to have little net direct cost
impact on employers, above and beyond the baseline of the current costs
required by the program as it is currently implemented.
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995 (2
U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) directs agencies to assess the effects of a
Federal regulatory action on State, local, and tribal governments, and
the private sector to determine whether the regulatory action imposes a
Federal mandate. A Federal mandate is defined in the Act at 2 U.S.C.
658(5)-(7) to include any provision in a regulation that imposes an
enforceable duty upon State, local, or tribal governments, or imposes a
duty upon the private sector which is not voluntary. Further, each
agency is required to provide a process where State, local, and tribal
governments may comment on the regulation as it develops, which further
promotes coordination between the Federal and the State, local, and
tribal governments. This IFR imposes no enforceable duty upon State,
local or tribal governments, nor does it impose a duty upon the private
sector that is not voluntary. In fact, the IFR imposes no duties
whatsoever upon State, local or tribal governments. The duties imposed
are completely upon the Federal government--the Chicago NPC of the
Office of Foreign Labor Certification in the Department that has and
will continue to instruct employers on a case by case basis of their
obligations to seek and hire U.S. workers and, failing the availability
of U.S. workers, H-2A workers.
D. Executive Order 13132--Federalism
Executive Order 13132 addresses the Federalism impact of an
agency's regulations on the States' authority. Under E.O. 13132,
Federal agencies are required to consult with States prior to and
during the implementation of national policies that have a direct
effect on the States, the relationship between the Federal government
and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
among the various levels of government. Further, an agency is permitted
to limit a State's discretion when it has statutory authority and the
regulation is a national activity that addresses a problem of national
significance. This IFR has no direct effect on the States, the
relationship between the Federal government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. The continuation of a procedure by which employers comply
with a statutory recruitment requirement imposes no additional duties
on the States.
E. Executive Order 13175--Indian Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175 requires Federal agencies to develop policies
in consultation with tribal officials when those policies have tribal
implications. This IFR regulates the H-2A visa program and does not
have tribal implications. Therefore, the Department has determined that
this E.O. does not apply to this rulemaking.
F. Assessment of Federal Regulations and Policies on Families
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999 (5 U.S.C. 601 note) requires agencies to assess the impact
of Federal regulations and policies on families. The assessment must
address whether the regulation strengthens or erodes the stability,
integrity, autonomy, or safety of the family. This IFR does not have an
impact on the autonomy or integrity of the family as an institution, as
it is described under this provision. The Department has determined
that there are no costs associated with the IFR; even if there were,
however, they are not of a magnitude to adversely affect family well-
G. Executive Order 12630--Protected Property Rights
Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and the Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights, prevents the Federal
government from taking private property for public use without
compensation. It further institutes an affirmative obligation that
agencies evaluate all policies and regulations to ensure there is no
impact on constitutionally protected property rights. Such policies
include rules and regulations that propose or implement licensing,
permitting, or other condition requirements or limitations on private
property use, or that require dedications or exactions from owners of
private property. The Department has determined this rule does not have
H. Executive Order 12988--Civil Justice Reform
Section 3 of E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, requires Federal
agencies to draft regulations in a manner that will reduce needless
litigation and will not unduly burden the Federal court system.
Therefore, agencies are required to review regulations for drafting
errors and ambiguity; to minimize litigation; ensure that it provides a
clear legal standard for affected conduct rather than a general
standard; and promote simplification and burden reduction. This IFR has
been drafted in clear language and with detailed provisions that aim to
minimize litigation. The purpose of this rule is to continue the
transition procedures to enable employers to continue to comply with
their statutory recruitment requirements. Therefore, the Department has
determined that the regulation meets the applicable standards set forth
in sec. 3 of E.O. 12988.
I. Plain Language
Every Federal agency is required to draft regulations that are
written in plain language to better inform the public about policies.
The Department has assessed this IFR under the plain language
requirements and determined that it follows the government's standards
requiring documents to be accessible and understandable to the public.
J. Executive Order 13211--Energy Supply
This IFR is not subject to E.O. 13211, which assesses whether a
regulation is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy. Accordingly, the Department has
determined that this rule does not represent a significant energy
action and does not warrant a Statement of Energy Effects.
K. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chap. 35; see 5 CFR
part 1320) requires that the OMB approve all collections of information
by a Federal
agency from the public before they can be implemented. Respondents are
not required to respond to any collection of information unless it
displays a current valid OMB control number. Information collections in
this IFR have been previously approved under OMB No. 1205-0466. No
change in that collection is proposed by this IFR.
L. Good Cause Exception
The Department finds good cause to adopt this IFR, effective
immediately, and without prior notice and comment. See 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3) and 553(d)(3). The reasons for extending the transition
period, discussed above, lead the Department to believe that action
must be taken quickly to ensure that the Department and employers are
able to meet their statutory obligations and to prevent confusion,
ensure program integrity, and maximize the availability of job
opportunities for the U.S. workforce during a time of economic crisis.
Absent this extension, on approximately October 18, 2009, employers
will be forced to comply with all elements of the 2008 Final Rule. In
order to avoid the confusion and disruption that this will cause, it is
essential that extension of the transition period be effective before
that date. This circumstance precludes the receipt and consideration of
comments before this rule becomes effective. In addition, as discussed
above, the Department has considered the comments received after the
promulgation of the April 16 Rule extending the transition period to
January 1, 2010. There was no significant opposition to the extension
and the current rule presents no new issues.
List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 655
Administrative practice and procedure, Foreign workers, Employment,
Employment and training, Enforcement, Forest and forest products,
Fraud, Health professions, Immigration, Labor, Passports and visas,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Unemployment,
Wages, Working conditions.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department amends 20 CFR
part 655 as follows:
PART 655--TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT OF FOREIGN WORKERS IN THE UNITED
1. The authority citation for part 655 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Section 655.0 issued under 8 U.S.C.
1101(a)(15)(E)(iii), 1101(a)(15)(H)(i) and (ii), 1182(m), (n) and
(t), 1184(c), (g), and (j), 1188, and 1288(c) and (d); sec. 3(c)(1),
Pub. L. 101-238, 103 Stat. 2099, 2102 (8 U.S.C. 1182 note); sec.
221(a), Pub. L. 101-649, 104 Stat. 4978, 5027 (8 U.S.C. 1184 note);
sec. 303(a)(8), Pub. L. 102-232, 105 Stat. 1733, 1748 (8 U.S.C. 1101
note); sec. 323(c), Pub. L. 103-206, 107 Stat. 2428; sec. 412(e),
Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681 (8 U.S.C. 1182 note); sec. 2(d),
Pub. L. 106-95, 113 Stat. 1312, 1316 (8 U.S.C. 1182 note); Pub. L.
109-423, 120 Stat. 2900; and 8 CFR 214.2(h)(4)(i). Section 655.00
issued under 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(ii), 1184(c), and 1188; and 8
CFR 214.2(h). Subparts A and C issued under 8 CFR 214.2(h). Subpart
B issued under 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a), 1184(c), and 1188;
and 8 CFR 214.2(h). Subparts D and E authority repealed. Subparts F
and G issued under 8 U.S.C. 1288(c) and (d); and sec. 323(c), Pub.
L. 103-206, 107 Stat. 2428. Subparts H and I issued under 8 U.S.C.
1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) and (b)(1), 1182(n) and (t), and 1184(g) and
(j); sec. 303(a)(8), Public Law 102-232, 105 Stat. 1733, 1748 (8
U.S.C. 1101 note); sec. 412(e), Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681; and
8 CFR 214.2(h). Subparts J and K authority repealed. Subparts L and
M issued under 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(c) and 1182(m); sec. 2(d),
Pub. L. 106-95, 113 Stat. 1312, 1316 (8 U.S.C. 1182 note); Pub. L.
109-423, 120 Stat. 2900; and 8 CFR 214.2(h).
2. Amend Sec. 655.100 by revising paragraph (b)(1) and the
introductory text of paragraph (b)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 655.100 Overview of subpart B and definition of terms.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Compliance with these regulations. Employers with a date of
need for H-2A workers for temporary or seasonal agricultural services
on or after June 1, 2010 must comply with all of the obligations and
assurances required in this subpart.
(2) Transition from former regulations. Employers with a date of
need for H-2A workers for temporary or seasonal agricultural services
prior to June 1, 2010 will file applications in the following manner:
* * * * *
Signed in Washington, DC, this 10th day of November 2009.
Assistant Secretary, Employment and Training Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-27496 Filed 11-16-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FP-P