№ files_lp_3_process_9_61928
File format: docx
Character count: 20150
File size: 48 KB
This document outlines the interpretation and application of U.S. visa regulations regarding equivalency of foreign degrees and professional experience for EB-2 visa applicants.
Year:
2003
Region / City:
United States
Topic:
Immigration, Work Visas, EB-2
Document Type:
Legal, Statutory Analysis
Organization:
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)
Author:
Efren Hernandez, Director of Business and Trade Services
Target Audience:
Immigration professionals, attorneys, and individuals applying for EB-2 visa
Period of Action:
Ongoing interpretation of regulations
Approval Date:
January 7, 2003
Date of Changes:
July 23, 2003
Price: 8 / 10 USD
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
Don’t have cryptocurrency yet?
You can still complete your purchase in a few minutes:- Buy Crypto in a trusted app (Coinbase, Kraken, Cash App or any similar service).
- In the app, tap Send.
- Select network, paste our wallet address.
- Send the exact amount shown above.
The final amount may vary slightly depending on the payment method.
The file will be sent to the email address provided at checkout within 24 hours.
The product description is provided for reference. Actual content and formatting may differ slightly.
Year:
2023
Region / City:
United States
Subject:
Labor Certification, Recruitment, TV Advertisements
Document Type:
Article
Agency / Organization:
U.S. Department of Labor
Author:
Rabindra K. Singh, Esq.
Target Audience:
Employers, Immigration Lawyers, HR Professionals
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Date of Approval:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Year:
Not specified
Country:
United States
Responsible institution:
U.S. Department of Labor (DOL)
Related agency:
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)
Subject:
Employment-based immigration and permanent labor certification
Document type:
Administrative procedural guideline
Immigration category:
EB-2 Employment-Based Second Preference
Program:
PERM (Program Electronic Review Management) Labor Certification
Target applicants:
U.S. employers sponsoring foreign workers
Special category:
EB-2 PERM Special Handling for full-time teaching faculty
Key forms:
ETA-9089; I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker; I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status
Recruitment requirements:
Prevailing wage determination, recruitment campaign, recruitment report
Processing stages:
PERM Labor Certification; I-140 petition; I-485 adjustment of status
Associated offices:
Office of the Attorney General (OAG); Office of International Programs and Services (OIPS); Human Resources (HR); International Tax Office
Fee structure:
Department legal fees, employee filing fees, optional premium processing fee
Processing timeline:
Approximately 4–10 months for PERM, 4–6 months for I-140, and 6–12 months for I-485 adjustment stage
Note:
Year
Institution:
Fire College
Course Number:
BFST1302
Course Title:
Fire Apparatus Operations
Document Type:
Worksheet
Purpose:
Course-to-Course Equivalency Request
Target Audience:
Applicants seeking course equivalency
Requirements:
Completed syllabus, transcript, and detailed JPR satisfaction documentation
Contact:
[email protected]
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Florida
Topic:
Fire Prevention Practices, Course Equivalency
Document Type:
Worksheet
Organization / Institution:
Florida Fire College
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Applicants seeking course equivalency
Effective Period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Modification Date:
Not specified
Year:
2021
Region / City:
Florida
Theme:
Course Equivalency Request
Document Type:
Instructional Guide
Organ / Institution:
Florida Fire College
Author:
Florida Fire College
Target Audience:
Applicants seeking Course Equivalency
Effective Period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Note:
Year
Year:
2026
Region / City:
Florida
Topic:
Fire Protection Systems
Document Type:
Course Equivalency Worksheet
Institution:
Florida Department of Financial Services
Author:
Florida Department of Financial Services
Target Audience:
Applicants for Course Equivalency Evaluation
Period of Validity:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
2026-02-08
Year:
2017
Region / City:
Florida, USA
Subject:
Fire Chemistry, Hazardous Materials, WMD Emergency Response
Document Type:
Worksheet
Organization / Institution:
Fire College
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Applicants for Course Equivalency Evaluation in Fire Chemistry
Period of Validity:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Date of Revisions:
N/A
Year:
2014
Region / City:
Florida
Topic:
Fire Safety Training, Course Equivalency Evaluation
Document Type:
Worksheet
Institution:
BFST (Bureau of Fire Standards and Training)
Author:
Frank Ennist
Target Audience:
Applicants requesting course equivalency evaluation
Period of validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of changes:
Not specified
Note:
Year
Document Type:
Worksheet
Organization / Institution:
Fire College
Target Audience:
Applicants seeking Course-to-Course Equivalency
Note:
Year
Year:
2026
Region/City:
Stillwater, Oklahoma
Theme:
Federal Programs, Education, Public Sector
Document Type:
Job Announcement
Organization:
Oklahoma Department of Career and Technology Education
Author:
Oklahoma Department of Career and Technology Education
Target Audience:
Job Seekers, Professionals in Education and Public Sector
Period of Action:
N/A
Approval Date:
January 2026
Amendment Date:
N/A
Course Codes:
FFP2720; BFST2720; ATPC2720
Program Title:
Company Officer / Fire Officer
Document Type:
Course Equivalency Request Form
Issuing Body:
Bureau of Fire Standards and Training (BFST)
Jurisdiction:
Florida
Related Standards:
NFPA 1021; NFPA 1001; NFPA 1041
Qualification Level:
Fire Officer Level I
Submission Method:
Email to [email protected]
Required Attachments:
Educational syllabus or agenda; Verifiable transcript; Completed worksheet
Subject Line Requirement:
Course Equivalency Request
Scope:
Job Performance Requirements (JPRs) for Fire Officer Level I
Evaluation Condition:
All required information must be submitted prior to review
Note:
Year
Topic:
Fire Service Hydraulics
Document Type:
Worksheet
Organization / Institution:
Florida State Fire College
Target Audience:
Applicants seeking Course-to-Course Equivalency
Year:
2026
Region / City:
California
Subject:
Employment qualifications
Document type:
Petition
Organization / Institution:
Cuesta College
Author:
Cuesta College Human Resources
Target Audience:
Job applicants
Effective period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Modification Date:
Not specified
Year:
2002
Region / City:
Illinois
Subject:
High School Equivalency Records, Computer-based Constitution Test
Document Type:
Access Request Form
Organization:
Regional Office of Education
Author:
Regional Superintendent
Target Audience:
Educational Institutions, Pearson VUE Testing Centers
Effective Period:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
Not provided
Modification Date:
Not provided
Context:
Access request form for managing access to high school equivalency records and constitution test data, including both additions and removals of user access to specific educational systems.
) and join the S1NET. For guides with in depth examinations of performance measure definitions, go to:
https://www.milsuite.mil/book/docs/DOC-129783
Table of Contents (Hyperlinks to Sections):
Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ OER Narratives: Notes, Rules, and Instructions OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: Negative Comment Rules Referred OERs Narrative Comment Examples Block a. APFT and HT/WT Block b. Overall Performance Block c. Character (to include SHARP comments) Block d. Presence Block e. Intellect Block f. Leads Block g. Develops Block h. Achieves Senior Rater Potential Senior Rater Narrative Examples Senior Rater Narrative Comment Examples (for potential, promotion, school, etc.) Successive Assignments Other SR Comments (explanations of anything unusual about OER) Effective Words for Evaluations JUNIOR OFFICER PLATE (DA FORM 67-10-1) NOTE: 2LTs who have NOT completed BOLC, will not receive an OER until they complete BOLC (AC and ARNG; USAR officers can receive an OER before completing BOLC). The FROM date will be their commissioning date. All time until their BOLC graduation will be NONRATED on their first OER. OER PROFILING: OERs: Rater and Senior Rater Profiles are CONSTRAINED, meaning Officers are only allowed to grant 49% of each rank they rate with either an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). HOWEVER, if you have an immature profile, and have only just begun rating/senior rating Officers of a certain rank, you are allowed a ONE TIME option of giving one of the first two evaluations you make at a particular grade, an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). OER (OER SUPPORT FORM) PART III: Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ (blocks a., b., and c.): Refer to DA PAM 611-21 (https://www.milsuite.mil/book/groups/smartbookdapam611-21
) and DA PAM 600-3 (Commissioned Officer Professional Development and Career Management), to assist in the development of PART III, block d. As a minimum, the duty description will include pr:
- Number of personnel supervised, - Amount of resources under the rated officer’s control, - Scope of responsibilities. 3) Descriptions must be clear and concise with emphasis on specific functions required. 4) Note conditions unique to the assignment; e.g. RA officers assigned to FT support duties with RC units or USAR officers assigned to RA units OER NARRATIVES: Notes, Rules, and Instructions Rater and Senior Rater Narratives: - Requires candor and courage; frank and accurate assessment. - Quantify officer’s value relative to peers and do so in concert with rater/senior rater box check. - Are short; tell a simple story about the quality of officer being evaluated. - Are interesting and compelling. - Are looked at by selection board members when they are looking for in-depth information about a rated officer’s performance and potential. - Numbers; 1-10, write them out (e.g. one, two, ten). 11 or higher, write the number; e.g. 11, 15, 105. Exception, when a 1-10 is WITH an 11 or higher; e.g. “5 tool kits with 20 tools each.” - Fashion the narrative to the officer; double check use of “he/his” vs. “she/hers.” - Awards: Awards and/or special recognition received during the rating period may be cited in evaluation comments (for example, “received the Humanitarian Service Medal” or “named the Instructor of the Year”). - Raters and SR CAN use the officer’s name in the narrative; e.g. “1LT Joe was ….” Rater and Rater Narratives: - Focus on PERFORMANCE; explaining what the rated officer did and how well he/she did it. - Focus on specifics to quantify and qualify performance. - Raters should advocate the rated officer to the SR. - When there is no SR (due to lack of qualifications), rater’s narrative provides the input on both performance and potential. Senior Rater (SR) and SR Narrative (see SR Rater Narrative section for examples): - Focus on POTENTIAL, 3-5 years out (promotions, command, school, & assignments). - Can amplify box checks by using the narrative to clearly send the appropriate message to selection boards. - CANNOT mention Box Check. - Additional information for when SR is also Rater can be found in DA PAM 623-3, pg. 26, “DA Form 67–10–1, part VI: block c—Senior Rater Narrative.” OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: - School/Course Comments: Bullets about how a Soldier did in a school or course are ONLY allowed if that school did not produce an AER/DA Form 1059. - Narratives are not a laundry list of superlatives – more is not necessarily better. - Brief, unqualified superlatives or phrases, particularly if they may be considered trite. - Excessive use of technical acronyms, or phrases not commonly recognized. - Techniques aimed at making specific words, phrases, or sentences stand out from the rest of the narrative; e.g. excessive use of capital letters; unnecessary quotation marks; repeated use of exclamation points; wide spacing between selected words, phrases, or sentences to include double spacing within a paragraph or between paragraphs. - Inappropriate references to box checks; e.g “Would be TOP BLOCK if profile allowed” or “absolutely far exceeded the standard”. - Trying to quantify (e.g. “top 2% of my captains”) with a small population. - Stay in your lane/level; avoid comments like “Best 1LT in the Army” unless you’re the Army CoS. - Stating “the best ever”; having 10 in the population, 50 in the profile. - Using overused phrases and clichés that are counterproductive or overused; e.g. stellar, historic, “delivered a dazzling performance,” “hit the ground running,” consummate professional, and unlimited potential. - Using specific selection board-type language. Examples of this include, “definitely a 6+ Soldier”. - Don’t exaggerate; “If I could prove it, CPT X is an LTC disguised as a CPT.” - Be mindful of what IS NOT said; it can have the same impact as what is said; e.g. NOT having numbers, or quantifiable points. - Don’t say the sa
Note:
en
Topic:
Officer Evaluation, Narrative Guidelines
Document Type:
Guide
Target Audience:
Raters, Senior Raters
Note:
Year
Region / City:
Australia
Subject:
Joint venture formation
Document Type:
Guide
Target Audience:
Solicitors, legal professionals
Year:
2023
Region / city:
California
Topic:
Anti-SLAPP motions
Document type:
Legal guide
Organization / institution:
N/A
Author:
N/A
Target audience:
Legal professionals
Period of validity:
N/A
Approval date:
N/A
Date of amendments:
N/A