Establishing a Fixed Time Period of Admission and an Extension of Stay Procedure for Nonimmigrant Academic Students, Exchange Visitors, and Representatives of Foreign Information Media

Federal RegisterAug 28, 2025

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

8 CFR Parts 214, 248, and 274a

[DHS Docket No. ICEB-2025-0001]

RIN 1653-AA95

Establishing a Fixed Time Period of Admission and an Extension of Stay Procedure for Nonimmigrant Academic Students, Exchange Visitors, and Representatives of Foreign Information Media

AGENCY:

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

ACTION:

Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

SUMMARY:

Unlike most nonimmigrant classifications, which are admitted for a fixed time period, aliens in the F (academic student), J (exchange visitor), and most I (representatives of foreign information media) classifications, with limited exceptions, are currently admitted into the United States for the period of time that they are complying with the terms and conditions of their nonimmigrant classification (“duration of status”). The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) proposes to amend its regulations by changing the admission period in the F, J, and I classifications from duration of status to an admission for a fixed time period.

DATES:

Comments must be received on or before September 29, 2025.

Information collection comment period:

Comments on the information collection described in the

Paperwork Reduction Act

section below must be received by October 27, 2025.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments on the entirety of this rule, which must be identified by Docket No. ICEB-2025-0001, through the following method:

•

Federal eRulemaking Portal:

https://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the website instructions to submit comments.

Comments on the information collection may be submitted to the same docket as the NPRM or as described in the “submitting comments” section below. In addition, all comments on the information collection must include the OMB Control Number in the body of the comments.

Comments submitted in a manner other than the Federal eRulemaking Portal, including emails or letters sent to the Department of Homeland Security (the Department or DHS), will not be considered comments, and will not receive a response from DHS. Please note that DHS cannot accept any hand delivered or couriered comments, nor any comments contained on any form of digital media storage devices, such as CDs, DVDs, and USB drives. If you cannot submit your material using

https://www.regulations.gov,

contact the person in the

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section of this document for alternate instructions.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Office of Regulatory Affairs and Policy, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security, 500 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20536. Telephone 202-732-6960 (not a toll-free number) (for questions only—no comments will be accepted at this phone number).

I. Public Participation

DHS encourages all interested parties to participate in this rulemaking by submitting data, views, comments, and arguments on all aspects of this notice of proposed rulemaking. Comments providing the most assistance to DHS will reference a specific portion of this rule, explain the reason for any recommended change and include the data, information, or authority that supports the recommended change. See the

ADDRESSES

section above for information on where to submit comments.

A. Submitting Comments

All comments must be submitted in English, or an English translation must be provided. If you submit comments, you must include the DHS docket number for this rulemaking (ICEB-2025-0001), indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. Include data, information, or the authority that supports the comment. Your comments must be submitted online by 11:59 p.m. of the last day of the comment period.

Instructions:

To submit your comments online, go to

https://www.regulations.gov

and insert “ICEB-2025-0001” in the “Search” box. Click on the rule that appears in the “Search Results.” Click on the “Comment” box under the name of the rule and input your comments in the text box provided. When you are satisfied with your comments, follow the prompts, and then click “Submit Comment.”

Collection of information.

You must submit comments on the collection of information discussed in this notice of proposed rulemaking to either DHS's docket or the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). OIRA will have access to and view the comments submitted in the docket. OIRA submissions can also be sent using any of the following alternative methods:

•

Email (alternative):

dhsdeskofficer@omb.eop.gov

(include the docket number and “Attention: Desk Officer for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, DHS” in the subject line of the email).

•

Fax:

202-395-6566.

•

Mail:

Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503; Attention: Desk Officer, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, DHS.

DHS will post your comments to the federal e-Rulemaking Portal at

https://www.regulations.gov

and will include any personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this information makes it public. You may wish to consider limiting the amount of personal information that you provide in any voluntary public comment submission. DHS may withhold from public viewing information provided in comments that it determines is offensive. For more information, please read the “Privacy & Security Notice” via the link in the footer of

https://www.regulations.gov.

DHS will consider all comments and materials received during the comment period and may change this rule based on your comments.

B. Viewing Comments and Documents

To view comments, as well as documents referenced in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to

https://www.regulations.gov

and insert “ICEB-2025-0001” in the “Search” box. Next, click on the name of the rule, and then click “Browse Posted Comments.” Individuals without internet access can request alternate arrangements for viewing comments and documents related to this rulemaking (see the

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section of this document). You may also sign up for email alerts on the online docket so that you will be notified when comments are posted, or a final rule is published.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

II. Acronyms and Abbreviations

CBP U.S. Customs and Border Protection

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

DOJ U.S. Department of Justice

DHS U.S. Department of Homeland Security

D/S Duration of Status

DOS U.S. Department of State

DSO Designated School Official

EAD Employment Authorization Document

ED U.S. Department of Education

EOS Extension of Stay

GAO U.S. Government Accountability Office

ICE U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

IIRIRA Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996

INA Immigration and Nationality Act

INS Immigration and Naturalization Service

NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

OPT Optional Practical Training

POE Port of Entry

PRC People's Republic of China

RFE Request for Evidence

RO Responsible Officer

SAR Special Administrative Region

SEVIS Student and Exchange Visitor Information System

SEVP Student and Exchange Visitor Program

SSR Special Student Relief

STEM Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics

U.S.C. United States Code

USCIS U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

III. Executive Summary

A. Purpose of the Proposed Regulatory Action

Studying and participating in exchange visitor and academic programs in the United States offers aliens access to world-renowned, individualized instructional and educational programs. Similarly, the United States allows foreign news and media members access to the United States as part of their foreign employment. Millions of aliens have come to the United States on a temporary basis in the F (academic student),

J (exchange visitor),

and I (representatives of foreign information media)

classifications.

Unlike aliens in most nonimmigrant classifications who are admitted until a specific departure date, F, J, and I (except for some I aliens from the People's Republic of China (PRC)) nonimmigrants are admitted into the United States for an unspecified period of time to engage in activities authorized under their respective nonimmigrant classifications. This unspecified period of time is referred to as “duration of status” (D/S). D/S for F academic students is generally the time during which a student is pursuing a full course of study at an educational institution approved by DHS, or engaging in authorized practical training following completion of studies, plus authorized time to depart the country.

D/S for J exchange visitors is the time during which an exchange visitor is participating in an authorized program, plus authorized time to depart the country.

D/S for I representatives of foreign information media is the duration of his or her foreign employment duties in the United States.

For dependents of principal F, J, or I nonimmigrants, D/S generally corresponds with the principal's period of admission so long as the dependents are also complying with the requirements for their particular classifications.

Since D/S was first introduced in 1978 for F nonimmigrants and 1985 for J and I nonimmigrants,

the number of F, J, and I nonimmigrants admitted each year into the United States has significantly increased.

In 2023 alone, there were over 1.6 million admissions in F status, a dramatic rise from when the legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) first shifted to D/S admission in 1979.

For example, in the 1980-81 school year, there were approximately 260,000 admissions in F status.

Similar growth in the J nonimmigrant population has also occurred over the past decades. In 2023, there were over 500,000 admissions in J status, up over 250 percent from the 141,213 J admissions into the United States in 1985.

Finally, there were 32,470 admissions for I nonimmigrant foreign media representatives in the United States in 2023, nearly double from the 16,753 admissions into the U.S. in 1985.

See

Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) 101(a)(15)(F), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F).

See

INA 101(a)(15)(J), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(J).

See

INA 101(a)(15)(I), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(I).

See

Office of Homeland Security Statistics, Yearbook of Immigration Statistics-Yearbook 2023, Table 25, Nonimmigrant Admissions by Class of Admission: Fiscal Years 2014 to 2023 at h

ttps://ohss.dhs.gov/topics/immigration/yearbook-immigration-statistics/yearbook-2023

(last visited Mar. 31, 2025).

Statutory and regulatory requirements restrict the duration of study for an alien who is admitted in F-1 status to attend a public high school to an aggregate of 12 months of study at any public high school(s).

See

INA section 214(m), 8 U.S.C. 1184(m);

See also

6 U.S.C. 271(a)(3), (b) (describing certain USCIS functions and authorities, including USCIS' authority to establish national immigration services policies and priorities and adjudicate benefits applications) and 6 U.S.C. 252(a)(4) (describing the authority of DHS's U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to collect information relating to foreign students and exchange program participants and to use such information to carry out its enforcement functions).

Section 248 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1258, permits DHS to allow certain nonimmigrants to change their status from one nonimmigrant status to another nonimmigrant status, with certain exceptions, as long as they continue to maintain their current nonimmigrant status and are not inadmissible under section 212(a)(9)(B)(i) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(9)(B)(i), relating to unlawful presence. Similar to extensions of stay, change of status adjudications are discretionary determinations.

Also, section 274A of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1324a, governs the employment of aliens who are authorized to be employed in the United States by statute or in the discretion of the Secretary.

See

INA 248(a), 8 U.S.C. 1258(a); 8 CFR 248.1(a).

Finally, the INA establishes who may be admitted as F, J, or I nonimmigrants. Specifically, section 101(a)(15)(F)(i) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F)(i), established the F nonimmigrant classification for, among others, bona fide students qualified to pursue a full course of study who wish to enter the United States temporarily, who have no intention of abandoning their residence in a foreign country, and solely for the purpose of pursuing a full course of study at an academic or language training school certified by SEVP, as well as for the spouse and unmarried children under the age of 21of such aliens.

See also

INA 214(m), 8 U.S.C. 1184(m) (limiting the admission of nonimmigrants for certain aliens who intend to study at public elementary and secondary schools).

See

INA 101(a)(15)(F), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F).

Section 101(a)(15)(J) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(J), established the J nonimmigrant classification for aliens who wish to come to the United States temporarily and have no intention of abandoning their residence in a foreign country, to participate in exchange visitor programs designated by the DOS, as well as for the spouses and unmarried children under the age of 21of such aliens in certain J-1 categories.

Section 101(a)(15)(I) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(I), established, upon a basis of reciprocity, the I nonimmigrant classification for bona fide representatives of foreign information media (such as press, radio, film, print) seeking to enter the United States to engage in such vocation, as well as for the spouses and children of such aliens.

Within DHS, SEVP is administered by ICE. SEVP is authorized to administer the program to collect information related to nonimmigrant students and exchange visitors under various statutory authorities. Section 641 of IIRIRA authorizes the creation of a program to collect current and ongoing information provided by schools and exchange visitor programs regarding F and J nonimmigrants during the course of their stays in the United States, using electronic reporting technology where practicable. Consistent with this statutory authority, DHS manages these programs pursuant to Homeland Security Presidential Directive-2 (HSPD-2), Combating Terrorism Through Immigration Policies (Oct. 29, 2001), as amended, (

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CPRT-110HPRT39618/pdf/CPRT-110HPRT39618.pdf

), and section 502 of the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002, Public Law 107-173, 116 Stat. 543, 563 (May 14, 2002) (EBSVERA) (codified at 8 U.S.C. 1762). HSPD-2 requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to conduct periodic, ongoing reviews of institutions certified to accept F nonimmigrants, and to include checks for compliance with recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Section 502 of EBSVERA directs the Secretary to review the compliance with recordkeeping and reporting requirements under 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F) and 1372 of all schools approved for attendance by F students within 2 years of enactment, and every 2 years thereafter.

B. Background

i. F Classification

Section 101(a)(15)(F)(i) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F)(i), permits aliens who are bona fide students to temporarily be admitted to the United States solely for the purpose for pursuing a full course of study at an established college, university, seminary, conservatory, academic high school, elementary school, or other academic language training program. Principal applicants are categorized as F-1 nonimmigrant aliens and their spouses and children who may accompany or follow to join as F-2 dependents.

See

INA 101(a)(15)(F)(i)-(ii), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F)(i)-(ii); 8 CFR 214.2(f)(3).

From 1973 to 1979, F students were admitted for one year and could be granted an EOS in increments of up to 12 months if they established that they were maintaining status.

However, on July 26, 1978, given the large number of nonimmigrant students in the United States at the time and the need to continually process their EOS applications, legacy INS proposed amending the regulations to permit F-1 aliens to be admitted for the duration of their status as students.

Legacy INS explained the changes would facilitate the admission of nonimmigrant students, provide dollar and manpower savings to the Government, and permit more efficient use of resources.

On November 22, 1978, a final rule was published to amend the regulations at 8 CFR 214 to allow INS to admit F-1 students for a D/S period as students.

That rule became effective on January 1, 1979.

See

38 FR 35425, 35426 (Dec. 28, 1973) (“The period of admission of a non-immigrant student shall not exceed one-year.”).

See

43 FR 32306 (July 26, 1978).

See

43 FR 32306, 32306-07 (July 26, 1978).

See

43 FR 54618, 54620 (Nov. 22, 1978) (“The period of admission of a nonimmigrant student shall be for the duration of Status in the United States as a student if the information on his/her form I-20 indicates that he/she will remain in the United States as a student for more than 1 year . . . If the information on form I-20 indicates the student will remain in the United States for 1 year or less, he/she shall be admitted for the time necessary to complete his/her period of study.”).

Subsequently, between January 23, 1981, and October 29, 1991, the INS amended the regulations addressing admission periods for F-1 students four more times.

On January 23, 1981, a

rule changed admission for F-1 nonimmigrants to a fixed period of admission,

i.e.,

the time necessary to complete the course of study, with the opportunity for an EOS on a case-by-case basis.

Legacy INS explained this was necessary because admitting nonimmigrants students for D/S resulted in questionable control over foreign students and contributed to problems in record keeping.

See

46 FR 7267 (Jan. 23, 1981), 48 FR 14575 (Apr. 5, 1983); 52 FR 13223 (Apr. 22, 1987); 56 FR 55608 (Oct. 29, 1991).

See

46 FR 7267 (Jan. 23, 1981).

Id.

On April 5, 1983, D/S was reinstituted with, among other changes, the implementation of new notification procedures for transfers between schools, improved reporting requirements for Designated School Officials (DSOs),

a limit for enrollment in one educational level, and a requirement for F-1 students to apply for an EOS and, if applicable, a school transfer to pursue another educational program at the same level of educational attainment.

A Designated School Official (DSO) means a regularly employed member of the school administration whose office is located at the school and whose compensation does not come from commissions for recruitment of foreign students

See

8 CFR 214.3(l).

See

48 FR 14575 (Apr. 5, 1983).

On April 22, 1987, a final rule outlined medical and academic reasons that would allow F-1 students to drop below a full-time course of study while remaining in D/S status, and clarified when an EOS or reinstatement must be requested.

See

52 FR 13223 (Apr. 22, 1987).

Finally, in 1991, the regulations were revised to implement Section 221(a) of the Immigration Act of 1990 (IMMACT 90), Public Law 101-649, 104 Stat. 4978, which established a three-year off-campus program for F-1 students,

and clarified the procedures for F-1 students seeking EOS and employment authorization utilizing the Form I-20.

The rule also gave DSOs the authority to grant program extensions (essentially an EOS) for F-1 students with a compelling academic or medical reason that prevented them from completing their educational program by a program end date and then to notify INS of the extension.

Since then, and pursuant to the 1991 final rule, DHS has relied on DSOs to report on student status, issue program extensions, and transfer students between programs and schools. Information from these nonimmigrant students is now tracked in SEVIS, to ensure government agencies have essential data related to nonimmigrant students to preserve national security. This is consistent with the requirements in IIRIRA, the USA PATRIOT Act, Public Law 107-56, and the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Report. Changes to D/S were proposed for F students in 2020, but the proposal was withdrawn in 2021.

See

56 FR 55608 (Oct. 29, 1991).

Form I-20, Certificate of Eligibility for Nonimmigrant Student Status, is the document used by DHS that provides supporting information for the issuance of a student visa. Applicants (including dependents) must have a Form I-20 to apply for a student visa, to enter the United States, and to apply for an employment authorization document to engage in optional practical training.

See

SEVP's web page, Form I-20, “Certificate of Eligibility for Nonimmigrant Student Status” at

https://studyinthestates.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/I-20_Intial.pdf

(last visited Mar. 17, 2025).

See

56 FR 55608 (Oct. 29, 1991).

See

85 FR 60526 (Sept. 25, 2020) and 86 FR 35410 (July 6, 2021).

ii. J Classification

The J nonimmigrant classification was created in 1961 by the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, also known as the Fulbright-Hays Act of 1961, Public Law 87-256, 75 Stat. 527 (22 U.S.C. 2451,

et seq.

), to increase mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries by means of educational and cultural exchanges. It authorizes aliens to participate in a variety of exchange visitor programs in the United States. The Exchange Visitor Program regulations cover the following program categories: professors and research scholars, short-term scholars, trainees and interns, college and university students, teachers, secondary school students, specialists, alien physicians, international visitors, government visitors, camp counselors, au pairs, and summer work travel.

See

INA 101(a)(15)(J), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(J); 22 CFR 62.20-62.32.

Prior to 1985, J exchange visitors were granted an initial admission for the period of their program up to one year.

In 1985, the regulations were amended to allow J exchange visitors to be admitted for the duration of their program plus 30 days.

This change from being admitted for a fixed period to D/S was implemented as part of a continuing effort to reduce reporting requirements for the public as well as the paperwork burden associated with processing extension requests on the agency.

Changes to D/S were proposed for J exchange visitors in 2020, but the proposal was withdrawn in 2021.

See

8 CFR 214.2(j)(1)(ii) (1985).

See

50 FR 42006 (Oct. 17, 1985).

Id.

See

85 FR 60526 (Sept. 25, 2020) and 86 FR 35410 (July 6, 2021).

A prospective exchange visitor must be sponsored by a DOS-designated program sponsor to be admitted to the United States in the J nonimmigrant classification and participate in an exchange visitor program. The DOS designated sponsor will issue a prospective J exchange visitor a Form DS-2019, Certificate of Eligibility for Exchange Visitor (J-1) Status. The DS-2019 permits a prospective exchange visitor to apply for a J-1 nonimmigrant visa at a U.S. embassy or consulate abroad or seek admission as a J-1 nonimmigrant at a port of entry. A J-1 exchange visitor is admitted into the United States for D/S, which is the length of his or her exchange visitor program.

Form DS-2019, Certificate of Eligibility for Exchange Visitor (J-1) Status, is the document required to support an application for an exchange visitor visa (J-1). It is a 2-page document that can only be produced through the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS). SEVIS is the DHS database developed to collect information on F, M, and J nonimmigrants (see 8 U.S.C. 1372 and 6 U.S.C. 252(a)(4)). The potential exchange visitor's signature on page one of the form is required. Page 2 of the current Form DS-2019 consists of instructions and certification language relating to participation. No blank Forms DS-2019 exist. Each Form DS-2019 is printed with a unique identifier known as a “SEVIS ID number” in the top right-hand corner, which consists of an “alpha” character (N) and 10 numerical characters (

e.g.,

N0002123457). The Department of State's Office of Private Sector Exchange Designation in the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA/EC/D) designates U.S. organizations to conduct exchange visitor programs. These organizations are known as program sponsors. When designated, the organization is authorized access to SEVIS and is then able to produce Form DS-2019 from SEVIS. The program sponsor signs the completed Forms DS-2019 in blue ink and transmits them to the potential exchange visitor and his or her spouse and unmarried children under the age of 21. J visa applicants must present a signed Form DS-2019 at the time of their visa interview. Once the visa is issued, however, the biographic information on the SEVIS record cannot be updated until the participant's program is validated (“Active” in SEVIS). The sponsor is required to update the SEVIS record upon the exchange visitor's entry and no corrections to the record can be made until that time. In addition, in the event a visa is needed, sponsors may issue a Form DS-2019 for a dependent spouse or child, the system will not permit a new Form DS-2019 to be created as long as the primary's SEVIS record is validated in initial or active status.

See

9 FAM 402.5-6(D)(1) (U), The Basic Form, available at

https://fam.state.gov/FAM/09FAM/09FAM040205.html

(last visited Mar. 20, 2025). While applicants must still present a paper Form DS-2019 to DOS in order to qualify for a visa, the SEVIS record is the definitive record of student or exchange visitor status and visa eligibility.

See

9 FAM 402.5-4(B) (U), Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) Record is Definitive Record, available at

https://fam.state.gov/FAM/09FAM/09FAM040205.html

(last visited Mar. 20, 2025).

Extensions of J exchange visitor programs are governed by DOS regulations.

If there is authority to

extend a program, the exchange visitor program sponsor's Responsible Officer (RO),

similar to the DSO in the F-1 student context, is authorized to extend a J exchange visitor's program by issuing a duly executed Form DS-2019.

Requests for extensions beyond the maximum program duration provided in the regulations must be approved by DOS, which adjudicates these extensions. USCIS does not adjudicate these program extensions; however, USCIS does adjudicate applications to extend a J nonimmigrant's stay based on an authorized program extension. As outlined above, consistent with the requirements in IIRIRA and the USA PATRIOT Act, Public Law 107-56, J exchange visitor programs are also monitored using SEVIS.

See

22 CFR part 62. These programs vary in length. For example, professors and research scholars are generally authorized to participate in the Exchange Visitor Program for the length of time necessary to complete the program, provided such

time does not exceed 5 five years.

See

22 CFR 62.20(i)(1). And, alien physicians, are generally limited to 7 years.

See

22 CFR 62.27(e)(2).

A Responsible Officer (RO) is an employee or officer of a sponsor who has been nominated by the sponsor, and approved by the U.S. Department of State, to carry out the duties outlined in 22 CFR 62.11.

See

22 CFR 62.43. A RO must be a citizen of the United States or a lawful permanent resident of the United States.

See

22 CFR 62.2.

iii. I Classification

Section 101(a)(15)(I) of the INA defines the I classification as, upon a basis of reciprocity, an alien who is a bona fide representative of foreign press, radio, film, or other foreign information media who seeks to enter the United States solely to engage in such vocation, and the spouse and children of such a representative, if accompanying or following to join him or her. Most nonimmigrant foreign information media representatives (with the exception of those presenting a passport issued by the People's Republic of China) are currently admitted for the duration of their employment. They are not permitted to change their information medium or employer until they obtain permission from USCIS.

See

8 CFR 214.2(i).

From 1973 to 1985, aliens admitted to the United States in I nonimmigrant status were admitted for a period of 1 year with the possibility of extensions.

In 1985, legacy INS amended the regulations to allow nonimmigrant foreign information media representatives to be admitted for the duration of their employment.

This change from a set time period of admission to admission for duration of employment for I nonimmigrants was implemented as part of a continuing effort to reduce reporting requirements for the public, as well as the paperwork burden associated with processing extension requests on the agency.

Through its administration of the regulations authorizing I nonimmigrants admission for duration of employment, DHS currently admits all I nonimmigrants for D/S with the exception of those presenting a passport issued by the People's Republic of China (other than a Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) passport or a Macau SAR passport).

Changes to D/S were proposed for I foreign media representatives in 2020, but the proposal was withdrawn in 2021.

See

38 FR 35425 (Dec. 28, 1973).

See also

50 FR 42006 (Oct. 17, 1985) (indicating that, prior to the publication of this rule, I nonimmigrants were admitted for one year).

See

8 CFR 214.2(i); 50 FR 42006 (Oct. 17, 1985).

Id.

See

87 FR 61959 (Oct. 13, 2022) and 85 FR 27645 (May 11, 2020).

See

85 FR 60526 (Sept. 25, 2020) and 86 FR 35410 (July 6, 2021).

C. Need for Rulemaking

i. Risks to the Integrity of the F, J, and I Nonimmigrant Classifications

DHS welcomes F academic students, J exchange visitors, and I representatives of foreign information media, but it also acknowledges that the sheer size of the population complicates oversight and vetting functions. Since 1980, the number of F nonimmigrant students admitted into the United States has more than sextupled.

Similarly, since D/S was introduced for J and I nonimmigrants in 1985, the number of exchange visitors admitted into the United States has more than quadrupled while the number of representatives of foreign information media has nearly doubled.

For example, approximately 260,000 F-1 nonimmigrant students were admitted into the United States during the 1980-81 school year.

See

U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., Controls Over Foreign Students in U.S. Postsecondary Institutions Are Still Ineffective,

supra

note 12, pg. ii. In fiscal year (FY) 2023, 1,625,740 F-1 nonimmigrant students were admitted into the United States.

See

DHS FY23, Quarter 4, tbl.4B,

supra

note 11.

In 1985, 110,942 exchange visitors and 16,753 representatives of the foreign information media were admitted into the United States.

See

U.S. Dept. of Justice, Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1997 U.S. Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, pg. 118, available at

https://archive.org/details/statisticalyearb1997bunit/page/n3/mode/2up

(last visited Mar. 19, 2025). In FY 2023, 481,280 exchange visitors and 32,470 representatives of the foreign information media were admitted into the United States.

See

DHS FY23, Quarter 4, tbl.4B,

supra

note 11.

The Department uses SEVIS, a web-based system, to maintain information regarding: SEVP-certified schools; F-1 students studying in the United States (and their F-2 dependents); M-1 students enrolled in vocational programs in the United States (and their M-2 dependents); DOS-designated Exchange Visitor Program sponsors; and J-1 Exchange Visitor Program participants (and their J-2 dependents). SEVIS is necessary for national security and is consistent with the requirements in IIRIRA, the USA PATRIOT Act, and the 9/11 Commission Report.

Employees of educational institutions and program sponsors, specifically DSOs and ROs, play a large role in SEVIS. They are responsible for monitoring students and exchange visitors, accurately entering information about the students' and exchange visitors' activities into SEVIS, and properly determining whether the student or exchange visitor's SEVIS record should remain in active status or change to reflect a change in circumstances.

Under this framework, an academic student or exchange visitor generally maintains lawful status by complying with the conditions of the program, as certified by the DSO or RO. However, a program extension and an extension of an alien's nonimmigrant stay are different. DHS believes it is appropriate for the DSO to recommend an extension of an academic program and an RO to recommend an extension of an exchange visitor program; however, an EOS involves an adjudication of whether an alien is legally eligible to extend his or her stay in the United States in a given immigration status and has been complying with the terms and conditions of his or her admission.

DHS believes that the determinations of program extension and EOS should be separated, with the DSO's and RO's recommendation being one factor an immigration officer reviews while adjudicating an application for EOS. Changing to a fixed period of admission would give immigration officers a mechanism to make this evaluation at reasonably frequent intervals.

See

8 CFR 214.3(g)(1), (g)(2) (detailing a DSO's reporting requirements); 214.4(a)(2) (stating that failure to comply with reporting requirements may result in loss of SEVP certification).

See

8 CFR 214.1(a)(3).

Additionally, DHS expects this change would deter and prevent fraud, as a requirement to check-in directly with an immigration officer is inherently likely to deter exploitation of perceived vulnerabilities in the F and J nonimmigrant classifications. The same benefits of direct evaluation, better recordkeeping, and fraud prevention also would apply to the I population.

ii. Risks Within the F Classification

While the F program can provide significant benefits to academic institutions and local communities, the Department is aware that the F-1 program is subject to fraud, exploitation, and abuse. Since 2008, multiple school owners and others have been criminally prosecuted for “pay-to-stay” fraud, in which school officials, in return for cash payments, falsely report that F-1 students who do not attend school are maintaining their student status.

In some cases, convicted school owners operated multiple schools and transferred students among them to conceal the fraud.

DHS is also concerned that DSOs at these schools were complicit in these abuses; some DSOs intentionally recorded a student's status inaccurately,

some issued program extensions to students who did not have compelling medical or academic reasons for failing to complete their program by its end date,

and some DSOs permitted students who failed to maintain status to transfer to another school rather than apply for reinstatement.

Beyond cases publicly identified by DHS and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), DHS is concerned about cases where DSOs were not aware of status violations by students.

Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Justice, Operator of English language schools charged in massive student visa fraud scheme (Apr. 9, 2008), available at

https://www.justice.gov/archive/usao/cac/Pressroom/pr2008/038.html

(last visited Mar. 20, 2025); Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Justice, Owner/Operator and employee of Miami-based school sentenced for immigration-related fraud (Aug. 30, 2010), available at

https://www.justice.gov/archive/usao/fls/PressReleases/2010/100830-02.html

(last visited Apr. 8, 2025); Press Release, Immig. and Customs Enf't, Pastor sentenced to 1 year for visa fraud, ordered to forfeit building housing former religious school (June 13, 2011), available at

https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/pastor-sentenced-1-year-visa-fraud-ordered-forfeit-building-housing-former-religious

(last visited Mar. 20, 2025); Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Justice, School Official Admits Visa Fraud (Mar. 12, 2012), available at

https://www.justice.gov/archive/usao/pae/News/2012/Mar/tkhir_release.htm

(last visited Apr. 8, 2025); Press Release, Immig. And Customs Enf't, Owner of Georgia English language school sentenced for immigration fraud (May 7, 2014), available at

https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/owner-georgia-english-language-school-sentenced-immigration-fraud

(last visited Mar. 20, 2025); Press Release, Immig. and Customs Enf't, 3 senior executives of for-profit schools plead guilty to student visa, financial aid fraud (Apr. 30, 2015), available at

https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/3-senior-executives-profit-schools-plead-guilty-student-visa-financial-aid-fraud

(last visited Mar. 20, 2025); Press Release, Immig. and Customs Enf't, Owner of schools that illegally allowed foreign nationals to remain in US as “students” sentenced to 15 months in federal prison (Apr. 19, 2018), available at

https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/owner-schools-illegally-allowed-foreign-nationals-remain-us-students-sentenced-15

(last visited Mar. 20, 2025).

Press Release, Immig. and Customs Enf't, 3 senior executives of for-profit schools plead guilty to student visa, financial aid fraud,

supra

note 59.

Former DSO Official Found Guilty of Visa Fraud, (May 20, 2019), available at

https://www.goffwilson.com/Blawg-entries/2019/former-DSO-Official-Guilty-of-Visa-Fraud.aspx

(last visited Mar. 20, 2025); ImmigrationReform.com, U.S. Removes 4,600 Fraudulent OPT Participants from the Program, (July 14, 2020), available at

https://www.immigrationreform.com/2020/7/2014/OPT-fraud-dhs-crackdown-immigrationreform-com

(last visited Mar. 25, 2025); Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Justice, Operator of English language schools charged in massive student visa fraud scheme,

supra

note 59; Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Justice, Owner/Operator and employee of Miami-based school sentenced for immigration-related fraud,

supra

note 59

;

Press Release, Immig. and Customs Enf't, Pastor sentenced to 1 year for visa fraud, ordered to forfeit building housing former religious school,

supra

note 59; Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Justice, School Official Admits Visa Fraud,

supra

note 59; Press Release, Immig. and Customs Enf't, Owner of Georgia English language school sentenced for immigration fraud,

supra

note 59; Press Release, Immig. and Customs Enf't, 3 senior executives of for-profit schools plead guilty to student visa, financial aid fraud,

supra

note 59; Press Release, Immig. and Customs Enf't, Owner of schools that illegally allowed foreign nationals to remain in U.S. as “students” sentenced to 15 months in federal prison,

supra

note 59.

For example, DHS identified a nonimmigrant who was an F-1 student at a dance school from 1991-2021. Although the reported normal length of the dance program is 5 years, the school issued 17 program extensions between 2003 (when the use of SEVIS was mandated) and 2020, claiming that the student needed more time despite nearly 30 years of enrollment. The student subsequently transferred to an English language training program at another school with a program start date in November 2022, despite more than 30 years in the United States as an F-1 student. The student remains in active F-1 status reportedly studying English as of May 7, 2025. Another student who was enrolled at the same school from 2009 to 2020 and had been an F-1 student since 2005, was granted 14 program extensions. DHS also identified three F-1 students in doctoral programs that have taken over 20 years to complete their programs, and five F-1 students at community colleges have been enrolled in associate degree programs for periods in excess of 5 years—some for as long as a decade. Student Exchange Visitor Program analysis of data in the Student Exchange Visitor Information System and valid as of May 7, 2025.

Press Release, Immig. and Customs Enf't, 3 senior executives of for-profit schools plead guilty to student visa, financial aid fraud,

supra

note 59.

Apart from concerns about DSOs and school owners involved in fraudulent schemes, DHS also has concerns about the actions of the aliens themselves. Some aliens have used the F classification to reside in the United States for decades by continuously enrolling in or transferring between schools, a practice facilitated by the D/S framework.

DHS has identified over 2,100 aliens who first entered as F-1 students between 2000 and 2010 and remain in active F-1 status as of April 6, 2025.

To extend their stay, these aliens enrolled in consecutive educational programs, they transferred to new schools, or DSOs repeatedly extended their program end dates. This practice is not limited to any one particular type of school; students at community or junior colleges, universities, and language training schools have maintained F-1 status for lengthy periods. While these instances of extended stay may not always result in technical violations of the law, DHS is concerned that such stays violate the spirit of the law, given that student status is meant to be temporary, with the alien having no intention of abandoning their residence in a foreign country, and for the primary purpose of studying, not as a way to remain in the United States indefinitely.

Monitoring F-1 students on post-completion OPT can be even more complicated because the students are no longer attending classes.

See

U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., GAO-14-356, Student and Exchange Visitor Program, DHS Needs to Assess Risks and Strengthen Oversight of Foreign Students with Employment Authorization, (Feb. 27, 2014), available at

https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-14-356.pdf

(last visited Apr. 4, 2025).

Student Exchange Visitor Program analysis of data in the Student Exchange Visitor Information System identifying the number of F-1 active students who began studying between 2000 and 2010, valid as of Apr. 6, 2025.

See

INA section 101(a)(15)(F)(i), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F)(i).

The use of the F classification to remain in the United States for decades raises doubts that the alien's intention was to stay in the United States temporarily, as required by the INA.

It also raises concerns as to whether those aliens are bona fide nonimmigrant students who are maintaining valid lawful status by complying with the terms of their admission, which include solely pursuing a full course of study and progressing to completing a course of study. Likewise, it raises concerns as to whether these aliens truly have the financial resources to cover tuition and living expenses without engaging in unauthorized employment.

See

INA section 101(a)(15)(F)(i), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F)(i).

Further, while some school owners and school executives have faced legal consequences for their violation of the law, nonimmigrants admitted for D/S generally do not accrue unlawful presence for purposes of the 3- and 10-year bars described in INA 212(a)(9)(B) and (C), 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(9)(B) and (C), unless an immigration officer finds they have violated their status in the context of adjudicating an immigration benefit request, or an immigration judge orders them excluded, deported, or removed.

Because F-1 nonimmigrant students are admitted for D/S, they generally do not file applications or petitions, such as EOS applications, with USCIS, and

therefore, immigration officers do not generally have an opportunity to determine whether they are engaging in F-1 nonimmigrant activities in the United States and maintaining their F-1 nonimmigrant status.

See

USCIS Interoffice Memorandum, “Consolidation of Guidance Concerning Unlawful Presence for Purposes of Sections 212(a)(9)(B)(i) and 212(a)(9)(C)(i)(I) of the Act” (May 6, 2009).

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has reported on DHS's concerns about DSOs and nonimmigrant students. In 2019, GAO and ICE published a report identifying fraud risks to SEVP related to managing school recertification and program training. The report included vulnerabilities associated with involving school owners and DSOs in overseeing the maintenance of status of F-1 students.

In the report, GAO identified fraud vulnerabilities on the part of both students and schools. Examples include students claiming to maintain status when they are not, such as failing to attend class or working without appropriate authorization, or school owners not requiring enrolled students to attend classes or creating fraudulent documentation for students who are ineligible for the academic program. GAO recommended that ICE develop a fraud risk profile and use data analytics to identify potential fraud indicators in schools petitioning for certification, develop and implement fraud training for DSOs, and strengthen background checks for DSOs.

In a 2019 report, GAO was asked to review potential vulnerabilities to fraud in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program. GAO examined, among other things, the extent to which ICE (1) implemented controls to address fraud risks in the school certification and recertification processes and (2) implemented fraud risk controls related to DSO training.

See

U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., GAO-19-297, DHS Can Take Additional Steps to Manage Fraud Risks Related to School Recertification and Program Oversight (Mar 18, 2019), available at

https://www.gao.gov/assets/700/697630.pdf

(last visited Apr. 3, 2025)

;

U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., GAO-11-411, Overstay Enforcement: Additional Mechanisms for Collecting, Assessing, and Sharing Data Could Strengthen DHS's Efforts but Would Have Costs (Apr. 15, 2011), available at

https://www.gao.gov/assets/320/317762.pdf

(last visited Apr. 4, 2025); and U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., GAO-12-572, Student and Exchange Visitor Program: DHS Needs to Assess Risks and Strengthen Oversight Functions (June 18, 2012), available at

https://www.gao.gov/assets/600/591668.pdf

(last visited Apr. 4, 2025).

Since publishing its 2019 report, GAO has updated its website to include comments to the Recommendations for Executive Action included therein. ICE has taken steps to implement the report's recommendations, including making a public announcement regarding changing the timeline for the recertification notification process for schools.

See

U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., Student and Exchange Visitor Program: DHS Can Take Additional Steps to Manage Fraud Risks Related to School Recertification and Program Oversight, RECOMMENDATIONS, (Mar. 18, 2019), available at

https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-297?mobile_opt_out=1#summary_recommend

(last visited Mar. 11, 2025).

DHS believes it can mitigate fraud risks in part through, as this rule proposes, setting the authorized admission and extension periods for F nonimmigrants as the length of the F nonimmigrant's specific program, not to exceed a 4-year period. It would establish a mechanism for immigration officers to assess these nonimmigrants at defined periods (such as when applying for an EOS in the United States beyond a 4-year admission period) and determine whether they are complying with the conditions of their classification. Immigration officers receive background checks, clearances, and training before DHS authorizes them to implement the nation's immigration laws, which includes as part of adjudicating the application, whether nonimmigrants meet the requirements to extend their stay, whether a student has violated his or her nonimmigrant status without the DSO's awareness or whether DSOs are engaging in fraud by not requiring students to attend classes or by falsifying documents. Immigration officers are further trained to assess applications for fraud indicators and conduct reviews and vetting that may assist in the detection of fraud or abuse. This would allow further opportunity for DHS to identify and hold accountable aliens who violate their F-1 status, as well as their educational institutions. DHS currently employs out-of-cycle reviews and recertification of SEVP-certified schools outlined in 8 CFR 214.3(h) to ensure the school's compliance with regulatory recordkeeping and reporting requirements. DHS may also conduct on-site reviews of schools at any time, which may lead to withdrawal of SEVP certification upon findings of noncompliance or regulatory violations. Under the current D/S framework, DHS might not detect an individual F-1 status violation for an extended period if the student stays enrolled in a school, does not seek readmission to the United States, and does not apply for additional immigration benefits. If DHS makes periodic assessments to verify that F-1 students are maintaining their student status, DHS could better detect and mitigate against these violations as well as violations by their school.

The proposed rule creates opportunities for this scrutiny if these nonimmigrants wish to remain beyond their fixed period of admission. This may also have the effect of deterring individuals who would otherwise seek to come to the United States and engage in some of the behaviors discussed above, believing they would be able to do so undetected for long periods of time. DHS believes this is a more appropriate way to maintain the integrity of the U.S. immigration system. Additionally, the Department believes the proposed changes would allow immigration officers to directly verify, among other things, that students applying for an EOS: have the funds needed to live and study in the United States without engaging in unauthorized work; are maintaining a residence abroad to which they intend to return; have pursued and are pursuing a full course of study; and are completing their studies within the 4 year generally applicable timeframe relating to their post-secondary education programs in the United States or are able to provide a permissible explanation for taking a longer period of time to complete the program.

For example, SEVP may withdraw a school's certification or deny a school's recertification if a DSO willfully issues a false statement, including wrongful certification of a statement by signature, in connection with a student's school transfer or application for employment or practical training.

See

8 CFR 214.4(a)(2)(v).

Finally, the D/S framework, because it reduces opportunities for direct vetting of foreign academic students by immigration officers, creates opportunities for foreign adversaries to exploit the F-1 program and undermine U.S. national security. An open education environment in the United States offers enormous benefits, but it also places research universities and the nation at risk for economic, academic, or military espionage by foreign students. Foreign adversaries are using progressively sophisticated and resourceful methods to exploit the U.S. educational environment, including well-documented cases of espionage through the student program.

Detecting and deterring emerging threats to U.S. national security posed by adversaries exploiting the F-1 program requires additional oversight. In 2022, in response to a Congressional inquiry, GAO investigated and made recommendations that ICE modify the SEVIS system to include factors that potentially indicate which foreign students or scholars may pose more risk of transferring technology at U.S. universities.

In January of 2023, Ji Chaoqun, a Chinese national who came to the United States to study electrical engineering at the Illinois Institute of Technology in 2013, was sentenced to 8 years for spying for the Chinese government.

See

CNN Politics, Chinese engineer sentenced to 8 years in U.S. prison for spying (Jan. 25, 2023), available at

https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/25/politics/chinese-engineer-sentence-spying-intl-hnk/index.html

(last visited Apr. 9, 2025). In Dec. 2019, Weiyun (Kelly) Huang, the owner of Findream and Sinocontech, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit visa fraud in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in Chicago. In return for payments, Findream listed aliens as OPT workers, providing them with what appeared to be legal status. The FBI charged one of those aliens with spying.

See

Kelly Huang Criminal Compliant (Mar. 28, 2019), available at https://media.nbcbayarea.com/2019/09/KellyHuangCriminalComplaint.pdf (last visited Apr. 2, 2025). Huang was sentenced to 37 months in federal prison for conspiracy to commit visa fraud. Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Justice, Chinese Business Woman Sentenced to 37 Months in Federal Prison for Conspiracy to Commit Visa Fraud (June 26, 2020), available at

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndil/pr/chinese-businesswoman-sentenced-37-months-federal-prison-conspiracy-commit-visa-fraud

(last visited

Apr. 2, 2025). This vulnerability presented in the nonimmigrant student classification has been highlighted by the FBI. In a 2018 hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee, the FBI Director testified about the threat from China, noting “that the use of nontraditional collectors, especially in the academic setting, whether it's professors, scientists, students, we see in almost every field office that the FBI has around the country. It's not just in major cities. It's in small ones as well. It's across basically every discipline. I think the level of naiveté on the part of the academic sector about this creates its own issues. They're exploiting the very open research and development environment that we have, which we all revere, but they're taking advantage of it. So, one of the things we're trying to do is view the China threat as not just a whole of government threat, but a whole of society threat on their end. I think it's going to take a whole of society response by us. So, it's not just the intelligence community, but it's raising awareness within our academic sector, within our private sector, as part of the defense.”

See

Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Hearing (Feb. 13, 2018), transcript available at https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/hearings/open-hearing-worldwide-threats (last visited Apr. 1, 2025)

; see also

Foreign Threats to Taxpayer—Funded Research: Oversight Opportunities and Policy Solutions: Hearing before the Senate Finance Committee (June 5, 2019) (Statement of Louis A. Rodi III), available at

https://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/05JUN2019RodiSMNT.pdf

(last visited Apr. 2, 2025). DSOs are not trained immigration officers nor are they in a position to make such determinations.

See

U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., GAO 23-106114, China, Efforts Underway to Address Technology Transfer Risk at U.S. Universities, but ICE Could Improve Related Data (Nov. 2022), available at

https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-23-106114.pdf

(last visited Apr. 3, 2025).

DHS believes that replacing admissions for D/S for F-1 students with admission for a fixed time period would help mitigate these national security risks by ensuring an immigration official directly and periodically vets applicants for extensions of stay and, in so doing, confirms they are engaged only in activities consistent with their student status. F-1 nonimmigrants applying for EOS will also be required to establish they are admissible, and failure to do so will result in denial of the EOS. Admissibility grounds are complex and are properly assessed by a trained DHS officer. Such an assessment is not currently made when F-1 nonimmigrants apply for an extension of their program with their institution.

Significantly, under the proposed changes to the period of admission of F nonimmigrants and the applicable EOS process, DHS would collect biometrics and other information (such as evidence of financial resources to cover expenses and evidence of any criminal activity) from F nonimmigrant students more frequently, thereby enhancing the Government's oversight and monitoring of these aliens.

In addition, DSOs may be unaware of a student's failure to maintain status, including by engaging in criminal activity, nor do they have the authority or ability to acquire such information. Admitting F-1 nonimmigrants for a fixed period of admission would provide trained immigration officers with the opportunity to vet these individuals.

iii. Risks Within the J Classification

DHS believes that the national security risks posed by D/S admissions for individuals admitted under the J classification are similar to those posed by the F classification.

According to a December 2018 report by a panel of experts commissioned by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to study foreign influence on federally-funded scientific research, “Small numbers of scientists have committed serious violations of NIH policies and systems by not disclosing foreign support (

i.e.,

grants), laboratories, or funded faculty positions in other countries.”

As with F nonimmigrants, setting the length of the J nonimmigrant's specific program to not exceed a 4-year period would establish a mechanism for immigration officers to assess these nonimmigrants at defined periods (such as when applying for an EOS in the United States beyond a 4-year admission period) and determine whether they are complying with the conditions of their classification. This will increase vetting of the J nonimmigrant population, which can help to prevent and deter nefarious actors.

In its 2019 Report to Congress, the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, the Commission described the U.S. Government's efforts to curb China's extensive influence and espionage activities in academic and commercial settings. The Commission noted that these efforts took the form of visa restrictions for Chinese nationals, greater scrutiny of federal funding awarded to universities, legal action against those suspected of theft or espionage, and new legislation.

See

U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, 2019 Annual Report to Congress (Nov. 2019), available at

https://www.uscc.gov/annual-report/2019-annual-report

(last visited Mar. 20, 2025).

See

U.S. National Institutes of Health Advisory Committee to the Director (ACD), ACD Working Group for Foreign Influences on Research Integrity (Dec. 2018) (discussing measures to address concerns about foreign influences related to graduate students and post-doctoral fellows, as well as foreign employees).

There are multiple examples of ongoing national security threats posed by J nonimmigrants. For example, in September 2019, a stark illustration of state-sponsored efforts to illegally obtain U.S. technology emerged when the FBI charged Chinese government official Zhongsan Liu with conspiracy to fraudulently procure U.S. research scholar visas for Chinese officials whose actual purpose was to recruit U.S. scientists for high technology development programs within China.

Liu was convicted of participating in conspiracy to defraud the United States and fraudulently obtain U.S. visas.

Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Justice, Chinese Government Employee Charged in Manhattan Federal Court with Participating in Conspiracy to Fraudulently Obtain U.S. Visas (Sept. 16, 2019), available at

https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/chinese-government-employee-charged-manhattan-federal-court-participating-conspiracy

(last visited Apr. 2, 2025).

See

Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Justice, Chinese Government Employee Convicted of Participating in Conspiracy to Defraud the United States and Fraudulently Obtain U.S. Visas (Mar. 23, 2022), available at

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/chinese-government-employee-convicted-participating-conspiracy-defraud-united-states

(last visited Apr. 1, 2025).

Additionally, in December 2019, Zaosong Zheng, a 29-year-old graduate student in J-1 status participating in an exchange visitor program at Harvard University, was stopped at Boston Logan International Airport. Federal agents determined he was a “high risk for possibly exporting undeclared biological material” after finding 21 vials of brown liquid wrapped in a plastic bag inside a sock in his checked luggage; typed and handwritten notes indicated “that [the exchange visitor] . . . was knowingly gathering and collecting intellectual property . . . possibly on behalf of the Chinese government.”

Zheng was indicted on one count of smuggling goods from the United States and one count of making false, fictitious or fraudulent statements.

See

Boston Herald, China may be behind theft of bio samples by Harvard-sponsored Chinese student, fed says (Dec. 30, 2019), available at

https://www.bostonherald.com/2019/12/30/peoples-republic-of-china-may-be-behind-theft-of-bio-samples-by-harvard-sponsored-chinese-student-feds-say/

(last visited Mar. 20, 2025);

See also

ICE's Re-entry for F-1 Non-immigrants Travelling Outside the United States for Five Months or Fewer web page, which notes, “Can I reenter if my request for OPT is pending? Yes, but traveling during this time should be undertaken with caution. USCIS may send you [an RFE] while you are away, however, so you will want to make sure you have provided a correct U.S. address both to your DSO and on the application and would be able to send in requested documents. Also, if USCIS approves your OPT application, you will be expected to have your EAD in hand to re-enter the United States. Like a request for further information, USCIS can only send the EAD to your U.S. address,” available at

https://www.ice.gov/sevis/travel

(last visited Apr. 1, 2025).

D. Transition Period

i. F and J Nonimmigrants

DHS proposes to generally allow all F and J nonimmigrants present in the United States on the final rule's effective date who are validly maintaining that status and who were admitted for D/S to remain in the United States in F or J status, without filing an EOS request, up to the program end date reflected on their Form I-20 or DS-2019 that is valid on the Final Rule's effective date, for a period not to exceed 4 years from the effective date of the Final Rule, plus an additional 60 days for these F nonimmigrants and 30 days for J nonimmigrants to depart the country.

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.1(m)(1).

F and J nonimmigrants who depart the United States after the rule's effective date and before the end date reflected on their Form I-20 or DS-2019 may be admitted with a new fixed admission period, like any other newly admitted F or J nonimmigrant, as provided for in proposed 8 CFR 214.1(a)(4) based on the date on their Form I-20 or DS-2019 and 30 days for departure.

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.2(f)(5) or (j)(1)(ii). Aliens who need additional time to complete their current course of study, including requests for post-completion OPT, STEM OPT, or academic training, or would like to start a new course of study or exchange visitor program would need to file for an EOS with USCIS for an admission period up to the new program end date, or OPT end date, listed on the Form I-20 or DS-2019, or successor form, reflecting such an extension, up to a maximum of 4-years.

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.1(m)(1).

For those aliens in F-1 status, admitted for D/S, present in the United States 60 days after the final rule publication who have timely filed on or before 6 months after the effective date of the final rule for an application for post-completion OPT or a STEM OPT extension, there would not be a requirement to file an EOS application, and, instead, they would be required to file the application for employment authorization for post-completion OPT or a STEM OPT extension.

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.1(m)(1)(i). An F-1 nonimmigrant who departs the United States before filing the application for post-completion OPT or STEM OPT, and is subsequently admitted to the United States with a fixed period of admission would be required to file both an application for employment authorization, (Form I-765 or successor form) and an EOS (Form I-539, or successor form), pursuant to 8 CFR 214.2(f)(11)(i)(B)(2) or (C). As discussed above concerning the general period of admissibility, an F-1 nonimmigrant who departs the United States while the application for employment authorization for post-completion OPT or STEM OPT is pending or once approved would be admitted for a fixed admission period pursuant to 8 CFR 214.1(a)(4)(iii). F-1 nonimmigrants who file for employment authorization for STEM OPT would remain eligible for the 180-day extension of their post-completion OPT EAD while their application for STEM OPT is pending pursuant to 8 CFR 274a.12(b)(6)(iv).

Regarding pending applications for employment authorization during the transition period, aliens in F status who are subject to the transition and who are seeking post-completion OPT and STEM-OPT employment authorization would be authorized to lawfully remain in the United States while the application is pending with USCIS if: (1) they are in the United States on the effective date of the final rule with admission for D/S; (2) they properly filed an application for employment authorization; (3) their application is pending on the final rule's effective date; and (4) they are not otherwise removable under the INA. Unless otherwise advised by USCIS, they would not have to file for an EOS or re-file an application for employment authorization.

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.1(m)(2). If the application for employment authorization is approved, the F-1 student would be authorized to remain in the United States in F-1 status until the expiration date of the EAD, plus 60 days as provided in their previous admission. If the employment application is denied, the F-1 student would continue to be authorized to remain in the United States until the program end date listed on their Form I-20, plus 60 days as provided in their previous admission, as long as he or she continues to pursue a full course of study and otherwise meets the requirements for F-1 status.

Aliens in F-1 status with pending employment authorization applications, other than post-completion OPT and STEM OPT, also would not need to file for an extension or refile an employment authorization application. As long as these F-1 nonimmigrants continue to pursue a full course of study and otherwise meet the requirements for F-1 status, they continue to be authorized to remain in the United States until the program end date listed on the Form I-20, plus 60 days, regardless of whether the employment authorization is approved or denied.

DHS believes that this transition proposal would not be unreasonably burdensome on F and J nonimmigrants, and it would enable DHS to transition F and J nonimmigrants without unduly burdening nonimmigrants, USCIS, or CBP. Many would be able to complete their programs per the terms of their initial admission (D/S) using the original program end date as an expiration of their authorized period of stay. DHS would grant such periods, which include an additional 60 days for F nonimmigrants and 30 days for J nonimmigrants as provided in their previous admission, automatically without an application or fee. With this option, DHS believes that the majority of F and J nonimmigrants will be shifted to a fixed period of admission of 4 years or less, except for some F-1 students and J-1 exchange visitors. For example, J-1 research scholars and alien physicians who have program end dates for up to 5 or 7 years respectively, would need to apply for an EOS before the 4-year maximum period of stay expires,

i.e.,

the date that falls 4 years after the rule becomes effective.

Another benefit of this option is that it would enable DHS to transition F and J nonimmigrants to an admission for a fixed time period without unduly burdening them, USCIS, or CBP. This option would ensure that no F and J nonimmigrants remain in the United States indefinitely by requiring all F and J nonimmigrants admitted for D/S who wish to extend their stay beyond their program end date or the 4-year maximum, whichever is applicable, to either file an EOS request or depart the United States and apply for admission at a POE by their program end date or the 4-year maximum period of stay from the final rule's effective date, plus an additional 60 days for F nonimmigrants, and 30 days for J nonimmigrants.

In proposing these transition procedures, DHS took into consideration the effect of transitioning to a fixed period of admission will have on F and J nonimmigrants originally admitted for D/S who chose to temporarily come to the United States to pursue a program of study or an exchange visitor program. DHS believes the proposed changes would not significantly affect the interests of these nonimmigrants admitted in D/S. DHS is not proposing to change the fundamental requirements to qualify for these nonimmigrant statuses, rather it is only proposing to change the length of time that an individual may lawfully remain in the United States in F or J status without filing an EOS application. Admitting these classifications of nonimmigrants for a fixed period of admission simply confirms that the admission is temporary and clearly communicates when that temporary admission period ends. Further, as is the case for the fixed period of admission policy more generally, a fixed date of admission simply places these nonimmigrants in the same position as most other nonimmigrants who are temporarily in the United States. They would still be able to continue to pursue their full course of study or exchange visitor program; however, if they need additional time in F or J status, the burden would now be upon them to request authorization directly from DHS and establish eligibility to extend their period of stay in such status, whereas previously they obtained an extension of lawful status in conjunction with a program extension through a DSO or RO.

At the same time, this proposed process would provide immigration officials an opportunity to directly review and determine whether F and J nonimmigrants who wish to remain in the United States beyond their fixed period of admission are complying with U.S. immigration law and are indeed eligible to retain their nonimmigrant status. If there are F or J nonimmigrants relying on a D/S admission in an attempt to permanently remain in the United States, or otherwise circumvent their authorized status, this proposed process would allow DHS to detect and deny an EOS request or entry under a new period of admission.

DHS considered several alternatives before determining the above proposal was the best option. First, DHS considered whether to impose a consistent length for the fixed admission for all F and J nonimmigrants transitioning from a D/S admission, such as 1 or 3 years from the final rule's effective date. While this proposal would provide a standard end date, DHS was concerned about the expense and workload implications of this option on all stakeholders and DHS. As noted, DHS expects most F and J nonimmigrants to complete their program of study or exchange visitor program within a 4-year period. A date that does not align with this expectation could place an unnecessary burden on the affected F and J nonimmigrants and on their academic institutions or exchange visitor programs' sponsors and employers, as applicable. USCIS would be especially affected if a significant percentage of these nonimmigrants chose to remain in the United States and file for an EOS in order to complete the balance of their program, study, or work activity. While USCIS could try to anticipate the volume, the sheer number of simultaneous nonimmigrants filing for EOS could significantly lengthen processing times. Because the proposed option is less burdensome on F and J nonimmigrants and on DHS, DHS does not believe that ending D/S for all F and J nonimmigrants at timeframes that do not align with the expected length of stay presents the best way to transition from D/S to admission for a fixed time period. The proposed transition period is consistent with the generally applicable policy and allows for the normal progress for most programs that nonimmigrants should be making. Further, it ensures that these nonimmigrants are complying with the terms and conditions of their status by requiring them to apply to extend their status by the end date on the I-20 or DS-2019, not to exceed 4 years.

A second option that DHS considered was to allow F and J nonimmigrants to keep their D/S period of admission until they depart the United States. The Department rejected this alternative, however, because one of the main reasons for proposing this rule is to address current abuse tied to the D/S period of authorized admission. Adopting this alternative would allow aliens currently violating their nonimmigrant status to largely avoid the consequences of non-compliance with U.S. immigration laws by simply remaining in the United States, as otherwise described in this rule.

Third, DHS evaluated an option to allow F and J nonimmigrants to retain their D/S admission up to their program end date, with the transfer to a fixed admission date implemented through any of the following actions of the nonimmigrant: (i) departure from the United States; (ii) transfer to a different institution or sponsor; (iii) failure to maintain a full course of study; (iv) approval for reinstatement;

(v) having

a DSO or RO extend the program end date; (vi) approval for a post-completion OPT or a STEM OPT extension; or (viii) engaging in any action that requires the issuance of a new Form I-20 or DS-2019. However, DHS felt that this alternative may fail to provide adequate notice to all affected nonimmigrants given the several scenarios under which the transfer to a fixed period of admission could occur and could lead to some fraud by DSOs intentionally providing an unnecessarily long program end date on the Form I-20 prior to the final rule's effective date. Although this option is relatively similar to the proposed transition process, to make the transition easier for F nonimmigrants, J nonimmigrants, ROs, and DSOs, triggering events were limited to those that result in a change to the program end date, as well as re-entry to the United States. In addition, while this option would allow DHS to effectuate the transition of the F and J population without requiring the expense and workload associated with large numbers of simultaneous filings, it would not capture those who have program end dates beyond 4 years from the effective date of the proposed rule.

See

8 CFR 214.2(f)(16), allowing an F-1 student, under certain circumstances, to apply for reinstatement with USCIS after receiving

recommendation from the DSO, following a failure to maintain status.

In sum, DHS's proposal is to transition all F and J nonimmigrants to a fixed admission date by using the program end date noted on their Form I-20 or DS-2019 (with the exception of F students engaging in post-completion or a STEM OPT extension who would use their EAD's expiration date), not to exceed 4 years, plus an additional 60 days for F nonimmigrants and 30 days for J nonimmigrants as provided in their previous admission. DHS believes this is a natural way to transition the majority of these nonimmigrants to a fixed admission date without creating any loopholes, such as those that could be created by allowing F and J nonimmigrants to retain their duration of status, potentially permitting those who are abusing their status to continue to do so without the oversight and vetting conducted through EOS. It would also provide all affected nonimmigrants with adequate notice of the events that would trigger the transition to a fixed admission date and their responsibilities resulting from such change.

ii. I Nonimmigrants

Turning to I nonimmigrants who are in the United States on the effective date of the final rule from their existing D/S admission to a fixed date of admission, DHS proposes an automatic extension of the length of time it takes the alien to complete his or her activity, for a period of up to 240 days.

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.1(m)(3). DHS based this proposed timeframe on the period of stay authorized in 8 CFR 274a.12(b)(20), which generally provides an automatic extension of employment authorization of 240 days to aliens, including I nonimmigrants, whose status has expired but on whose behalf an application for an extension of stay was timely filed through a Form I-539, Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status,

see

8 CFR 214.2(i), which currently is also required when an I nonimmigrant changes employers or information mediums.

DHS believes that adopting an already established timeframe, to which I nonimmigrants are already accustomed, is reasonable. Consistent with the current process, an I nonimmigrant who departs the United States after the final rule's effective date and would like to return to the United States in that same status would need to reapply for admission as an I nonimmigrant at a POE.

See

Instructions for Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status, available at

https://www.uscis.gov/i-539

(last visited Apr. 1, 2025).

I nonimmigrants who seek to remain in the United States longer than the automatic extension period provided would be required to file an extension of stay request with USCIS.

100

In addition to I nonimmigrants being familiar with the timeframe under 8 CFR 274a.12(b)(20), DHS anticipates that this provision would reduce any gaps in employment due to USCIS' processing timeframes between the I nonimmigrant's application for extension and USCIS approval of the application. It would also facilitate an I nonimmigrant's ability to complete his or her assignment while temporarily in the United States on behalf of a foreign media organization, in that it would give ample time to any I nonimmigrant to either complete that assignment or ask for an extension, as needed.

100

In FY 2023, fewer than 33,000 aliens entered the U.S. in I classification.

See

DHS FY23, Quarter 4, tbl.4B,

supra

note 11.

Under this proposal, if the EOS request is denied, the alien must cease working and depart the United States immediately. As with most other nonimmigrant classifications, they would not be given any period of time to prepare for departure from the United States after the denial, and there may be significant immigration consequences for failing to depart the country immediately. For example, such aliens generally would begin to accrue unlawful presence the day after the issuance of the denial. DHS believes this proposed standard provides parity across nonimmigrant classifications.

Finally, DHS proposes the transition procedures would not apply to F, J, or I aliens who are outside the United States when the final rule takes effect, or to any aliens present in the United States in violation of their status.

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.1(m).

E. Requirements for Admission, Extension, and Maintenance of Status of F Nonimmigrants

DHS is proposing various changes under the regulations that provide the framework for admission, extension, and maintenance of status for F nonimmigrants. These changes would eliminate D/S, require students to file an EOS if requesting to remain in the United States beyond the period of their admission, and clarify terms to ensure that the activities an F nonimmigrant has engaged in are consistent with those of a bona fide student.

i. Admission for a Fixed Time Period

As a preliminary matter, DHS is proposing to strike the existing regulation that allows F nonimmigrants to be admitted for D/S. DHS would replace it with a provision allowing F nonimmigrants to be granted status for the length of their program, not to exceed 4 years.

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.2(f)(5)(i) and (f)(7)(vi).

Second, DHS proposes to retain in the regulations the statutory limitation that restricts public high school students to an aggregate of 12 months of study at any public high school(s).

See

8 CFR 214.2(f)(5)(i). However, this proposed rule moves this provision to a new section and further clarifies that the 12-month aggregate period includes any school breaks and annual vacations.

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.2(f)(5)(i)(C). Current requirements, including paying the full cost of education, would also remain in place.

Third, F-1 students who are applying to attend an approved private elementary or middle school or private academic high school would continue to be covered by the provisions of 8 CFR 214.2(f)(6)(i)(E). These provisions require the DSO to certify a minimum number of class hours per week prescribed by the school for normal progress toward graduation.

See

8 CFR 214.2(f)(6)(i)(E). However, like all other F-1 students, they would be subject to the 4-year maximum period of admission, and they would need to apply for an EOS with DHS if staying beyond this period.

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.2(f)(7)(vi).

Fourth, DHS is proposing to exempt part-time border commuter students from the general length of admission provisions.

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.2(f)(5)(i)(B). The regulations at 8 CFR 214.2(f)(18) would continue to govern these border commuter students, including that DHS continue to admit them for a fixed time period. This proposed rule will apply to border commuter students attending school in the United States on a full-time basis.

Fifth, F-1 students in a language training program would be restricted to an aggregate of 24 months of language study, which would include breaks and an annual vacation.

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.2(f)(5)(i)(A). DHS is proposing this limitation as a way to prevent abuse of the F-1 program. Public Law 111-306, enacted on December 14, 2010, and effective since 2011, requires language training schools enrolling F-1 students to be accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by ED. DHS has found students enrolling in lengthy periods of language training, in some cases for more than two decades.

101

DHS has also identified students who enrolled in language training programs despite previously being enrolled in or completing undergraduate and graduate programs requiring English language proficiency.

102

Unlike degree programs that typically have prescribed course completion requirements, there are no nationally-recognized, standard completion requirements for language training programs and students are able to enroll in language training programs for lengthy periods of time. The lengthy enrollment in a language program, including enrollment in language courses for long periods subsequent to completion of a program of study that requires proficiency in English, raises concerns about whether the F-1 nonimmigrants meet the statutory definition of a bona fide student with the intent of entering the United States for temporary study.

103

Therefore, DHS proposes a 24-month aggregate limit for F-1 students to participate in a language training program, as it would provide a reasonable period of time for students to attain proficiency while mitigating the Department's concerns about the integrity of the program. This timeframe generally comports with the amount of time needed to gain the highest level of English proficiency under the Cambridge English Exam.

104

101

For example, one student has been enrolled in English language training programs at nine different schools since January 3, 2003. This student is active in SEVIS, reportedly studying English full time as of May 7, 2025—accounting for more than 22 years of language training. The student's most recent school issued a program extension changing the student's program end date from January 2, 2025, to January 2, 2026. The school input the following reason for the extension: “Student pursuing advanced level linguistic studies.” The school's 2025 catalog contains no references to linguistic studies—advanced or otherwise—and indicates the school offers general English academic preparation, TOEFL preparation, and business English courses. Student Exchange Visitor Program analysis of data in the Student Exchange Visitor Information System and valid as of May 7, 2025.

102

SEVIS Records show that for example a student who entered the country in 2005 studied English and then between January 2011 and December 2024, he enrolled in a bachelor's program in Biology/Biological Sciences, a master's program in Biotechnology, and a second master's program in Bioinformatics. He also engaged in post-completion OPT and two periods of STEM OPT. Each of his Forms I-20 indicated the academic programs required English proficiency, and the student had English proficiency. However, in January 2025, the student transferred to a language training school and remains active in SEVIS reportedly engaged in English language training as of May 7, 2025. DHS found at least 20 similar examples. Student Exchange Visitor Program analysis of data in the Student Exchange Visitor Information System and valid as of May 7, 2025.

103

See

INA 101(a)(15)(F).

104

According to Cambridge English, it takes approximately 1,000 to 1,200 hours to achieve the highest level of English proficiency from being a beginner of English. This is based on the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR), which is an international standard for describing language ability. Given that an academic year is 9 months, it would take the average F-1 student less than 18 months (or less than 24 months to include summer breaks and annual vacations) to achieve advanced English proficiency through guided instruction.

See

Guided Learning Hours, Cambridge English, 2025, available at

https://support.cambridgeenglish.org/hc/en-gb/articles/202838506-Guided-learning-hours

(last visited Mar. 31, 2025).

Sixth, DHS proposes students with pending employment authorization applications who are admitted based on the DSO's recommended employment end date for post-completion OPT or STEM OPT specified on their Form I-20, with a notice issued by USCIS indicating receipt of the Application for Employment Authorization, Form I-765 or successor form for post-completion OPT or STEM OPT, and who cease employment authorized pursuant to a post-completion OPT- or STEM OPT-based EAD that expires before the alien's fixed date of admission as noted on their Arrival-Departure Record (Form I-94 or successor form), be considered to be in the United States in a period of authorized stay from the date of the expiration noted on their EAD until the fixed date of admission as noted on their I-94 (unless the student violates the terms of the authorized stay).

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.2(f)(5)(i)(D).

Seventh, the authorized period of stay for F-2 dependents will continue to not be able to exceed the authorized period of stay of the principal F-1 alien. DHS proposes adding this requirement to 8 CFR 214.2(f)(5)(i)(E).

ii. Changes in Educational Objectives

Under existing regulations, all F-1 students who change from one educational level to another or pursue multiple degrees in the same educational level are considered to be maintaining status.

See

8 CFR 214.2(f)(5)(ii). DHS has observed that some students continuously enroll in different programs at the same degree level, such as by pursuing multiple associate, master's, undergraduate, bachelor's, or certificate programs. Alternatively, some students change to a lower educational level, such as completing a master's degree and then changing to an associate's program or an English language training program.

105

This has enabled some aliens to remain in the United States for lengthy periods of time in F-1 student status, raising concerns about the temporary nature of their stay. In 2024, DHS identified nearly 77,000 F-1 students who have spent more than 10 years in student status since SEVIS was implemented in 2003.

106

This includes individuals who enrolled in programs at the same educational level as many as 19 times, as well as students who completed graduate programs and then enrolled in undergraduate programs, including associate's degrees.

105

Ibid.

106

Student Exchange Visitor Program analysis of data in the Student Exchange Visitor Information System and valid as of Mar. 17, 2025.

DHS has also observed a pattern of students immediately transferring schools or changing educational levels or programs of study upon their arrival in the United States. These students often use an admission letter and Form I-20 from a well-known school to increase their odds of obtaining a student visa and then immediately request a transfer to their intended school or program of study once they have gained admission to the United States. Some of the most egregious examples are those who apply to a 4-year university, which requires demonstration of sufficient English level skills for enrollment in classes through the passage of the Test of English as a Foreign Language test (commonly known as TOEFL), receive their visa based on their declared intention of attending a 4-year university, and then transfer to English language programs upon arrival. Other, more dangerous examples, include those foreign students who receive a visa based on their declared intention to study the humanities, but then transfer into sensitive programs such as nuclear science. A handful of those have been

arrested for spying for China.

107

The existing regulations are vulnerable to exploitation by aliens who threaten U.S. national security. This proposed rule is designed to reduce this vulnerability. Since 2020, there have been over 13,000 F-1 students who transferred before the start of classes or within their first term, including over 4,400 students transferring from a higher education to English language training program of study within their first term or session of a program of study. The number of F-1 students who changed their educational levels within the first 60 days of their program is close to 8,400. While the number of students transferring or changing educational levels represents a small percentage of the total F-1 student population, these transfers are often promoted by third-party recruiters and other for-profit entities to allow aliens to use the student visa process to mask their intent in the United States or circumvent F-1 restrictions.

108

In addition, school officials are often burdened with the administrative costs of processing SEVIS transfer requests from F-1 students who misrepresented their intentions of studying at their institution.

107

See CNN Politics, Chinese engineer sentenced to 8 years in US prison for spying,

supra

note 72, and Select Committee on Intelligence Hearing (Feb. 13, 2018),

supra

note 72.

108

On May 29, 2020, President Trump signed a Presidential Proclamation to suspend the entry as nonimmigrants of certain students and researchers from the People's Republic of China.

See

Proc. No. 10043, 85 FR 34353 (May 29, 2020). Since this proclamation, students often circumvent enforcement of this proclamation by applying to a permissible program of study to obtain a student visa and admission to the United States and then transferring or changing their program of study to engage in studies, research, and other activities that are prohibited. This is also a tactic used by international and third-party recruiters.

See

Inside Higher Ed., Gaming the Student Visa System (Jan. 12, 2024), available at

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/global/international-students-us/2024/01/12/international-admission-offices-plagued-fraud-and

(last visited Mar. 31, 2025).

While there may be legitimate cases of students who wish to change their educational objective to gain knowledge at a lower or at the same educational level, the traditional path of study typically progresses from a lower educational program to a higher one. The existing regulations present a model consistent with the majority of bona fide students who follow this traditional trajectory. The term “full course of study” as defined in the existing regulations requires that the program “lead to the attainment of a specific educational or professional objective.”

109

Repeated changes to a program of study either within the same educational level or to move to a lower level, as well as immediate changes to a program of study upon initial entry into the United States, are not consistent with attainment of such an educational or professional objective. This understanding was reflected in the preamble to a 1986 rulemaking proposing changes to the F regulations, which stated: “The proposed regulation . . . places limitations on the length of time a student may remain in any one level of study. Thus, the Service has eliminated applications for [EOS] for students who are progressing from one educational level to another but has placed a control over students who, for an inordinate length of time, remain in one level of study.”

110

But, by 1991, INS eliminated all EOS applications and began to rely on DSO's to make the decision on whether educational progress was being made. In the decades that have followed, it has become clear that this has enabled thousands to stay here for decades by switching programs and not making any upward progress.

111

109

See

8 CFR 214.2(f)(6)(i).

110

51 FR 27867 (Aug. 4, 1986).

111

By reviewing SEVIS data as of Apr. 4, 2025, DHS has identified 2,134 aliens who first entered as F-1 students between 2000 and 2010 and remain in active F-1 status today.

DHS proposes to restrict school transfers and changes of educational objectives within a student's first academic year of a program of study, unless an exception is authorized by SEVP, and to prohibit F-1 students in a graduate level program of study from changing educational objectives or transferring from within the United States. “Educational objectives” refers to an F-1 student's educational level or major.

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.2(f)(5)(ii)(A) and 8 CFR 214.2(f)(8)(i)(b). DHS believes these proposed changes would accommodate the legitimate academic activities of bona fide students, such as a desire to pursue a different field of study or more specialized studies in their current field. These proposed changes would also provide SEVP with flexibility to grant exceptions for extenuating circumstances. For example, an exception may be appropriate when a school closes or when a school has a prolonged inability to hold in-person classes due to a natural disaster or other causes.

In addition, an alien who has completed a program as an F-1 nonimmigrant at one educational level would be unable to maintain F-1 status, depart and be admitted in F-1 status, or otherwise obtain F-1 status (

e.g.,

via a change of status) through a program at the same educational level or a lower educational level.

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.2(f)(5)(ii)(C). However, an F-1 student who has completed a program in the United States at one educational level and is beginning a new program at a higher educational level would be considered to be maintaining F-1 status if they otherwise comply with requirements under 8 CFR 214.2(f).

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.2 (f)(5)(ii)(B).

DHS believes that it is reasonable for a student to progress to a higher educational level as that is the traditional trajectory in the pursuit of higher education. Movement within the same level after completion of a program or to a lower educational level raises concerns regarding whether the F-1 alien is a bona fide student who intends to temporarily and solely pursue a full course of study rather than pursuing different degrees as a de facto way to prolong their stay in the United States.

If an F-1 student who has completed their first academic year of a program of study seeks to change educational objectives and this change would require an EOS, the alien would then apply for EOS using the form designated by USCIS, paying the required fee and following all form instructions, including submitting any biometrics required by 8 CFR 103.16.

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.2(f)(5)(ii)(D).

DHS recognizes that this proposal may require updates to SEVIS and other systems. Because the timeframe for those updates is not fixed and there could be technical issues regarding implementation, DHS is proposing to include a provision whereby the Department may delay or suspend implementation, at its discretion, if it determines that the change in educational level limitation is inoperable for any reason.

See

proposed 8 CFR 214.2(f)(5)(ii)(E). If DHS delays or suspends the provisions in this section governing the change in educational level, DHS will make an announcement of the delay or suspension to the academic community through SEVP's various communication channels, including

ICE.gov/sevis

, Study in the States (

https://studyinthestates.dhs.gov

), and SEVIS Broadcast Message. DHS would also announce the implementation dates of the change in degree level provision through SEVP's communication channels (

ICE.gov/sevis

, Study in the States, and SEVIS Broadcast Message) at least 30 calendar days in advance.

Additionally, DHS proposes to retain the term “educational” with respect to a change in level as the Department

believes it accurately reflects current academic models.

Specifically, “educational” captures programs for non-degree students, whereas using a term such as “degree” may not. For example, an F-1 student currently would not qualify for additional post-completion OPT if he or she changes to a non-degree certificate program, given that the certificate program is not a “higher educational level.” Similarly, certificate programs for professional advancement are typically not considered to be a “higher educational level” that would allow F-1 students to qualify for additional post-completion OPT.

DHS believes these proposals would encourage F-1 students to complete the programs of study for which they were admitted to the United States and to only pursue additional programs of study that demonstrate an upward progression in degree levels, which is expected from a qualified bona fide student who is coming to the United States temporarily and solely to pursue a course of study. The Department believes that these new restrictions would not significantly impact the choice of bona fide students who come to the United States temporarily to complete a full course of study. The F-1 program, with its statutory requirement that an alien be a bona fide student who seeks to enter the United States temporarily and solely for the purpose of pursuing a full course of study at the school listed on his or her Form I-20 or successor form, should not be used by aliens wishing to remain in the United States indefinitely. These proposals will better ensure that this statutory intent is fulfilled without hindering the options presented to bona fide students seeking study at higher educational levels and thus would create a balanced solution to this issue.

iii. Preparation for Departure

DHS believes that the time allotted for F students to prepare for departure should be revised from 60 to 30 days.

See

8 CFR 214.2(f)(5)(iv) and proposed 8 CFR 214.2(f)(5)(v). Under existing regulations, F-1 students are provided 60 days following the completion of their studies and any practical training to prepare for departure from the United States.

See

8 CFR 214.2(f)(5)(iv). However, this is twice as long as other student and exchange visitor programs (J and M nonimmigrants).

See

8 CFR 214.2(j)(1)(ii) and (m)(10)(i). In addition, this 60-day period is also six times longer than certain nonimmigrants who are authorized to remain in the United States for years but are only provided with a 10-day period to depart the United States. For example, DHS provides a 10-day period following the end of the alien's admission period as stated on his or her I-94 for individuals in the E-1, E-2, E-3, H-1B, L-1, and TN classifications in a 2016 rulemaking.

112

In the rulemaking discussing this 10-day period for departure, DHS noted that a grace period of up to 10 days after the end of an authorized validity period provides a reasonable amount of time for such nonimmigrants to depart the United States or take other actions to extend, change, or otherwise maintain lawful status.

113

It is thus unclear to DHS why F students would need a significantly longer period of time—60 days—to prepare for departure when other nonimmigrants have less time to prepare for departure.

114

112

See

8 CFR 214.1(l)(1) (providing for 10-day grace periods for certain nonimmigrants).

113

See

81 FR 82398, 82401 (Nov. 18, 2016).

114

Rulemakings in the mid-1980s mention this 60-day period for departure but did not provide any explanation as to why this period of time to depart was given to students.

See e.g.,

52 FR 13223 (Apr. 22, 1987) (referencing the proposed rule, and stating that in the “proposed regulations, duration of status was defined to mean the period during which a student is pursuing a full course of studies in any educational program, and any period or periods of authorized practical training, plus sixty days,” but not indicating the reason for the 60-day period). 51 FR 27867 (Aug. 4, 1986) (proposing that duration of status would consist of an additional “sixty days within which to depart from the United States,” but silent on the reason for the 60-day period of departure).

DHS believes that 30 days for the F nonimmigrant population is the appropriate balance between a 60-day and a 10-day period of departure. DHS believes that the F classification, albeit distinct from M or J, shares a core similarity in that many aliens in these classifications are seeking admission to the United States to study at United States educational institutions. Thus, DHS thinks that these classifications should have a standard period of time to prepare for departure, or take other action to extend, change, or otherwise maintain lawful status. DHS thinks that 30 days is an adequate period for F-1 students to prepare for departure and is in line with similar classifications (the M and J departure periods).

Additionally, in the 2016 rulemaking establishing a 10-day grace period for certain nonimmigrant classifications, DHS chose to remove the phrase “to prepare for departure from the United States or to seek an extension or change of status based on a subsequent offer of employment” from the proposed regulatory text relating to the purpose of the grace period, with the justification that it was unnecessarily limiting and did not fully comport with how the existing 10-day grace period may be used by individuals in the H, O, and P nonimmigrant [visa] classificatio

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.