TRAVEL DAYS ARE AUTHORIZED ON 1/3/89 AND 4/7/89. PHASE TWO WILL
REQUIRE 16 OFFICERS AND 6 CLERKS TO BE SELECTED FROM THE

SOUTHERN, NORTHERN, AND EASTERN REGION AS FOLLOWS:

ASYLUM APPLICATION TRAINING WILL BE ON 1/4/89 AND 1/5/89 AT
HARLINGEN. THE HARLINGEN DISTRICT OFFICE AND SOUTHERN REGION
WILL PROCURE SUFFICIENT SPACE AND EQUIPMENT. THE HARLINGEN
DISTRICT DIRECTOR SHALL DESIGNATE A TASK FORCE LEADER.

THE MIAMI TASK FORCE WILL BE FOR SIX MONTHS FROM 1/4/89 TO
7/6/89 WITH TRAVEL DAYS ON 1/3/89 AND 7/7/89. ADDITIONAL TRAVEL
DAYS MAY BE AUTHORIZED IN THE CASE OF ROTATIONS. THE TASK FORCE
WILL CONSIST OF 20 EXAMINATIONS OFFICERS AND 7 CLERKS FROM THE
NORTHERN, SOUTHERN AND EASTERN REGION AS FOLLOWS:

ASYLUM APPLICATION TRAINING WILL BE CONDUCTED IN MIAMI ON 1/4/89
AND 1/5/89. THE SOUTHERN REGION AND MIAMI DISTRICT OFFICE WILL

PROCURE NEEDED SPACE AND EQUIPIENT.

THE MIAMI DISTRICT DIRECTOR SHALL DESIGNATE A TASK FORCE LEADER.
THE DETAILERS SHALL BE SELECTED USING THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA:
EXAMINATIONS OFFICERS

CANTINE CUSTS WILL UF FUNDED BY COND!, PROJECT COUP 904.

Mr. MORRISON. The gentleman from Florida, and then the gentleman from California.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. I will even take Texas.

Mr. MORRISON. Did I say Florida? From Texas, I am sorry.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to follow-up on a couple of questions that our colleague from Kentucky asked a few minutes ago. Commissioner Nelson, this is in regard to testimony that we expect to hear in a few minutes from Mr. Harry Pachon, who is National Director of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials, and I just want to give you the opportunity to respond to a couple of things mentioned in his testimony.

A question you were asked a while ago by our colleague, Congressman Mazzoli, I would like to follow-up on. You admitted that there was a decline in U.S. citizenship adjudications. In this case, Mr. Pachon says, "This may be the result of the INS shifting naturalization staff to legalization duties and not because of the lack of demand."

Do you agree with that, or do you think there has been a lack of demand or that there is another explanation?

Mr. NELSON. My understanding, Mr. Smith, and again Mr. Norton can give the figures or we can provide them, is that overall the last number of years there has been a significant and regular increase in naturalization applications and it is something we have encouraged. Now whether there has been a dip in the process, I don't know. We can get the figures. But overall I think it has gone up, and I think the process has worked well. Now that is the important point. I do think, you know, there are different ethnic groups that have historically had lower rates of naturalization. I think Mr. Pachon and I would agree that more needs to be done by the Government, by the interest groups and others to improve the rate of application by all groups. I mean the ideal is that everybody who comes as a lawful permanent resident-immigrant eventually ought to become a citizen, and that is the goal. We ought to all do more to accomplish that goal.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. In regard to that goal, also as was mentioned a while ago, we were given figures as to the alleged average amount of time that it took for an applicant to become naturalized, and the figures were given a while ago; Dallas is 20 months, and so forth. As I understood your answer a while ago, the actual figure, the average nationwide is 6 months. The 4 plus the 2, not the 20, the 18, the 14

Mr. NELSON. That is correct.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Is that correct?

Mr. NELSON. Correct.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Also in his testimony there is this statement. That one of the hidden problems of naturalization is the high rate of applications that the INS rejects and returns. While the INS maintains that the official rate is 1 percent, our research has discovered it is actually closer to 33 percent.

Mr. NELSON. Well, we would welcome getting that information. I have not had a chance to see that testimony. And I would hope Mr. Pachon and NALEO and others would provide us that information, and if it is accurate, then we can deal with it. It does not sound

accurate; I would have to dispute it on the face. Obviously, the people have to pass an exam. We work with them to the idea of getting them to pass it. A high percentage do. I think we are seeing a similar process at work in the legalization program, where the goal is to get people to qualify.

So, if this 33 percent has any meaning, I would think it would only be in those people that maybe have to come back to do some further work in order to pass. Maybe that is the difference, I don't know. But I think our process is effective and efficient, and we would say to Mr. Pachon and others let's get some more cooperation and assistance parallel to the legalization by the groups, to work with INS, work with our outreach and others' to, again, do more to get people to naturalize-want to and, in fact, do naturally.

[The information follows:]

The following information was provided subsequent to the hearing: IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE

Naturalization Applications Returned

The Service's analysis of workload through the first half of fiscal year 1989 (October 1, 1988 through March 31, 1989) disputes the claim that 33 percent of naturalization applications and petitions are returned. The Servicewide return rate for these applications and petitions is 11.7 percent.

Attached for your review are forms G-325 and N-400 as requested.