data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/aa1d4/aa1d4967dab0a4bf4524a20dfa4da62711319d60" alt="clapping :clapping:"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/dec5f/dec5ff41c49759e4212e2c3753bb6cdc121ddcab" alt="thewave :thewave"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/00ce3/00ce3d2e461e5d35cea5e3f7252f26cb5ef429fd" alt="Texas Flag :txflag:"
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
As I understand it, the 25% reject rate is with the FBI, not DPS. DPS doesn't require new prints for renewals, only the FBI fingerprint card. When I was working with an attorney at FBI HQ on a new processing procedure for CHL's, she made the comment that when the Real ID Act that went fully into effect in May, they were expecting to get buried in non-criminal background check requests. If that happened, and I believe it did, then the FBI may be looking for reasons to reject prints and they too may be pushing for digital submissions.Liberty wrote:A 25% reject rate sounds pretty absurd. I know that in the past the FBI wasn't rejecting them at anywhere near at that rate. Somein is getting pretty picky at opur expense. Sounds like these rejects are being done to help out the FAST people. Moving towards FAST means more hassle for applicants and mokes it almost imposible to get it all done in one day. Forcing FAST on us by rejecting more prints isn't streamlining, but sharing the wealth to another psuedo government agency. It means that our aplication fees get a little more expencive.
There have been huge advances in Digital image processing. Before private digital prints were available I will bet that rejects rates were never 25% Yet the DPS is for some reason today is having a more difficult time reading the prints.
Then they are missing a trick here... if I were CHL section king and making these changes, and they improve processing time, I would be tooting my horn like crazy after all the bad press DPS/CHL has been getting the past couple years. I'd push to send a letter to every legislator about it -- especially the ones that have been pinging DPS about their constituents' delays.Charles L. Cotton wrote:I'm sure there will be no announcements about changes in processing procedures, personnel assignments, etc., ...ELB wrote:Excellent, thank you Mr. Cotton.
Is there a date at which they will be making announcements about the changes?
thx
elb
Chas.
It could make it very difficult. For instance If I had to go to Houston during a work day, during work hours, I would have to consider nor renewing. For those living the in big City, and don't have to go to work every day, the inconvenience isn't so great. The One Stop aspect makes it a whole lot easier for working people.Charles L. Cotton wrote: However, I agree that having to make an appointment with FAST and go to another location will be less convenient on the front end. I don't know what other instructors are going to do, but I will reduce the cost of my classes by the fee I pay to a LEO to roll the prints. (I don't charge for photos since I do them myself.) Hopefully, some FAST franchise holders will be willing to travel to classrooms to do the prints, but even if they do, I suspect they will have a minimum class size requirement.
Chas.
These are good points Liberty. I'll pass them along to Mr. Jones and suggest that they require FAST to have weekend hours and/or some "mobile" franchise holders. CHL applicants shouldn't have to take a day off of work to apply. Of course, no fingerprints at all in 2011 would be even better.Liberty wrote:It could make it very difficult. For instance If I had to go to Houston during a work day, during work hours, I would have to consider nor renewing. For those living the in big City, and don't have to go to work every day, the inconvenience isn't so great. The One Stop aspect makes it a whole lot easier for working people.Charles L. Cotton wrote: However, I agree that having to make an appointment with FAST and go to another location will be less convenient on the front end. I don't know what other instructors are going to do, but I will reduce the cost of my classes by the fee I pay to a LEO to roll the prints. (I don't charge for photos since I do them myself.) Hopefully, some FAST franchise holders will be willing to travel to classrooms to do the prints, but even if they do, I suspect they will have a minimum class size requirement.
Chas.
Mr. Cotton - I hope I am not reading to much into this little statement. Sure would be nice.Liberty wrote:Of course, no fingerprints at all in 2011 would be even better.![]()
stash wrote:Mr. Cotton - I hope I am not reading to much into this little statement. Sure would be nice.Liberty wrote:Of course, no fingerprints at all in 2011 would be even better.![]()
Stan
These are good points Liberty. I'll pass them along to Mr. Jones and suggest that they require FAST to have weekend hours and/or some "mobile" franchise holders. CHL applicants shouldn't have to take a day off of work to apply. Of course, no fingerprints at all in 2011 would be even better.Charles L. Cotton wrote:
It could make it very difficult. For instance If I had to go to Houston during a work day, during work hours, I would have to consider nor renewing. For those living the in big City, and don't have to go to work every day, the inconvenience isn't so great. The One Stop aspect makes it a whole lot easier for working people.