Overview
Title
30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Request for Approval of Special Validation for Travel to a Restricted Country or Area
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The State Department is asking people to share their thoughts on a special rule that lets them visit places where travel is usually not allowed, like North Korea, to make sure it's safe. People have until February 5, 2021, to say what they think about this idea.
Summary AI
The Department of State is seeking public comments on a proposed information collection concerning travel to restricted countries or areas, specifically focusing on the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK). This collection aims to determine eligibility for special passport validations that allow travel to such areas. These validations are important due to the ongoing restrictions imposed by the State Department for safety reasons. Interested parties have until February 5, 2021, to submit their comments.
Abstract
The Department of State has submitted the information collection described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 we are requesting comments on this collection from all interested individuals and organizations. The purpose of this Notice is to allow 30 days for public comment.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document in question is a formal notice issued by the Department of State as published in the Federal Register. It highlights the Department's request for public comments regarding a proposed information collection process for special passport validations. These validations enable individuals to travel to countries or areas restricted due to safety concerns. Specifically, the document addresses the restrictions related to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), reiterating the importance of these validations for ensuring applicant safety and compliance with federal regulations.
Summary of the Document
The Department of State has submitted a request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to collect specific information from individuals wishing to travel to restricted countries using a U.S. passport. This comes as part of its duty under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 to solicit public input. The validations are necessary to determine whether individuals qualify for exceptions under U.S. law to travel to regions where passport use is unauthorized. The focus is on the DPRK, where travel restrictions have been in place for several years due to safety concerns. Public comments are open until February 5, 2021.
Significant Issues and Concerns
There are several issues and concerns with the document and the proposed process. Firstly, the absence of a formal application form raises questions about the consistency and accuracy of the validation process. Without standard documentation, there's a risk of incorrect evaluations. Additionally, the document references legal and regulatory materials such as the 22 CFR 51.64 and Executive Order 11295, which are not easily understandable to the general public. This could lead to misunderstandings about the process and criteria.
The renewal of DPRK travel restrictions without detailed justification could cause skepticism regarding the decision-making process of the Department. Furthermore, the stringent requirements for obtaining a multiple-entry validation may be difficult for applicants to interpret and fulfill without additional guidelines. The document's lack of clarity on appealing a denied request may also lead to concerns about procedural fairness.
Impact on the Public
For the general public, the document represents an opportunity to provide input on a matter of international travel policy. Those interested in the safety protocols and administrative processes within federal travel restrictions may find relevance in participating in the feedback process. However, the complexity and specificity of the document might deter potential contributors who are not well-versed in administrative law or the current geopolitical landscape.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For journalists, humanitarian workers, and organizations such as the Red Cross, this notice directly affects how they conduct activities in restricted areas. The provisions for special passport validations are crucial for them to fulfill objectives in places like the DPRK. The rigorous criteria for obtaining these validations could create additional administrative burdens but ensure that only those with a legitimate need are granted access.
The document's procedural opacity, particularly concerning appeals, could disproportionately impact those who rely on repeat travel for crucial missions. Lack of clear processes may also affect individuals whose work involves urgent travel to hazardous regions, potentially delaying life-saving endeavors or critical reporting.
In summary, while the proposed information collection addresses important safety and regulation compliance concerns, its execution and clarity need attention to ensure effectiveness and fairness. Public input, as solicited by the Department, may serve to refine the process, ultimately shaping the policy in a manner that balances security, transparency, and bureaucratic efficiency.
Issues
• The document does not provide a clear cost estimate for the processing of special validation requests, which could lead to wasteful spending if not managed properly.
• It is unclear how the Department of State ensures that the applicants truly meet the criteria for special validation without a formal form; relying solely on documentation submitted by the applicant may lead to inconsistencies or inaccuracies.
• The document refers to specific regulations and executive orders (e.g., 22 CFR 51.64, Executive Order 11295) which may not be familiar to the general public, making the text difficult to understand for laypersons without additional context.
• The repeated renewal of passport restrictions for the DPRK without explanation for the continued necessity may raise questions about the ongoing evaluation process used to assess the danger to public health or safety.
• The complexity of the requirements for a multiple-entry validation, such as the expectation for a well-established history of trips to DPRK, may not be clearly understood by applicants without additional guidance.
• The obligation to respond section states 'Required to Obtain or Retain a Benefit' without further clarification, which might confuse applicants regarding their obligations.
• There is no mention of the process for individuals to appeal or contest if their request for special validation is denied, which could be a point of concern for transparency and fairness.