ACA's Response to Proposed Rule No. 1991-99: Fee on F-1, J-1, and M-1 Non-Immigrants

This is the American Camping Association's formal response to the Director of Policy Directives and Institutions Branch at the Immigration and Naturalization Service about Proposed Rule No. 1991-99, authorizing the collection of a fee on F-l, J-1, and M-1 non-immigrants:

The American Camping Association (ACA) represents 2700 camps throughout the United States, employs an estimated 200,000 full and part-time personnel and contributes nearly 9 billion dollars to the American economy. ACA camps serve an estimated 2 million campers every year. Our members employ approximately 16,000 J-1 non-immigrants each year for periods ranging from two to four months.

The ACA opposes the implementation of the rule as proposed. We believe the rule is badly flawed for the following reasons:

1. The rule goes well beyond the intent of the congress to monitor the activities of students residing in the United States for periods of 4 years or more.
2. The fee will discourage short-term exchange students and workers from seeking summer work in the United States, creating a manpower shortage in camps and other facilities that depend on these individuals to meet employment demands.
3. If the students/workers are unwilling to pay the fees, that burden falls to the facilities that employ them, creating a financial burden on those facilities. The additional costs would mean (a) passing the new expense on to consumers, causing a reduction in business, and/or (b) reducing services, making the facility less competitive.
4. The recruiting season for 2000 and beyond is already well underway. Non-immigrant recruits are not aware of the fee. They are committing under false pretenses.
5. It is reasonable to assume that other countries will retaliate by requiring fees from American students and workers seeking opportunities abroad.
6. The Rule does not mention, nor does it provide for, the costs of paperwork and manpower required in the fee collection process.
7. The Rule does not address the potential liability of the facility in collecting and accounting for the fees.
8. The proposed fees are highly discriminatory in that a student in the United States for four years is assessed the same fee imposed upon a camp counselor in the United States for four months.
9. The Rule does not realize any benefit under CIPRIS for the INS tracking system for
   two reasons:
   1. there is no need to track camp counselors since the camps already know who they are, where they are, and how long they are going to be in this country; and
   2. by the time the information is collected and centralized under CIPRIS, the camp counselor will have left the country.

The ACA believes that it was not the intent of the authorizing legislation's sponsor, former Senator Alan Simpson of Wyoming, to affect camps and camp counselors in this way. His discussion of the legislation specifically addressed the need to track the activities of long-term students, not short-term summer employees. We believe these unintended consequences create an undue burden on our industry and restrict commerce unnecessarily.

The ACA, therefore, urges the INS to provide a permanent exemption to the Rule for individuals in the United States for less than a year. The ACA also urges the INS to reconsider the entire fee structure and the inequities built into the formula. Beyond those two considerations, the ACA urges the INS to extend the effective dates beyond the year 2000 in order for all those affected to adjust to the change and ensure that no student entering the United States for any reason is enticed here ignorant of these fees.