FR 2021-00638

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), has issued a notice inviting public comments on a proposed extension of a currently approved information collection related to naturalization papers. This process is in line with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, and the proposed extension does not introduce any changes to the current requirements. This document serves as both an invitation and a guide for those who wish to participate in the public comment process.

General Overview

The purpose of this information collection is to assist USCIS in updating their records to reflect the new status of individuals who have completed the naturalization process. Specifically, the form used in this collection is filled out by court clerks who oversee the oath of allegiance for naturalization. This collection also helps in creating an audit trail for naturalization certificates and addressing compensation for the courts’ expenses related to the process. The deadline for public comments is March 15, 2021.

Key Issues

While the document serves its purpose by inviting public comments, there are several areas that may cause confusion. For instance, the notice mentions limiting communications due to COVID-19 actions taken by USCIS, but it does not specify what these limitations entail. This could lead to uncertainty among those wishing to participate in the comment process. Additionally, the document presents the estimated public burden cost of $7,200 without breaking down how this figure was calculated, leaving room for interpretation errors.

Another challenge the document presents is the prevalent use of regulatory and bureaucratic jargon, such as "OMB Control Number" and "e-Docket ID number." Terms like these without clear clarifications can make it difficult for the average reader to fully grasp the content and participate effectively.

The document also refers to creating an "audit trail on the certificates of naturalization" without explaining what this entails, leading to ambiguity regarding this aspect of the process.

Public Impact

For the general public, this document represents an opportunity to engage with the USCIS by providing feedback on the information collection process. It encourages informed participation by assessing the necessity, accuracy, quality, and burden of this data collection. However, the issues noted above may impede individuals’ ability to engage meaningfully.

Impact on Stakeholders

For court clerks who handle the completion of this form, the document reiterates their role in the naturalization process without introducing changes. However, the lack of detailed explanations may lead to doubts about procedural expectations.

Federal, state, local, and tribal government agencies that collaborate with USCIS might find the document reinforces existing procedures without addressing how to improve the process or alleviate existing burdens.

Those who advocate for smooth and accessible bureaucratic processes might view this document as falling short of facilitating easy public participation due to the use of specialized language and lack of detailed clarifications.

Conclusion

In summary, while the document offers a platform for public involvement, it raises issues that could hinder participation and comprehension. Addressing these concerns and simplifying the language within future notices could significantly enhance stakeholder engagement and clarity around the processes involved in naturalization information collection.

The document under discussion involves an estimated financial burden associated with a government information collection activity. Specifically, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is extending an existing data collection, and they estimate that the total annual cost to the public will be $7,200.

Overview of Financial Reference

The $7,200 figure represents the total estimated annual cost burden related to the collection of information named the Monthly Report on Naturalization Papers. This financial estimate is the only explicit monetary figure provided and relates to how much money the process may cost those involved in supplying the information.

Analysis Relating to Identified Issues

One of the issues identified is the lack of clarity in breaking down how the $7,200 cost estimate was calculated. The document does not offer detailed insights into the components or calculations that led to this figure. Such a breakdown could include costs related to personnel time, the use of technology, materials needed for documentation, and any other expenses incurred by those responding to the information collection request. Without this information, respondents and stakeholders may have difficulty understanding how their contributions and resources are being evaluated in financial terms.

Moreover, the use of regulatory terms and specific references like "OMB Control Number 1615-0051" and "e-Docket ID number" could further obscure the financial implications for the general public. These terms are specific and technical, potentially creating a barrier for understanding how the $7,200 financial estimate impacts the public or how the costs are distributed among various entities involved.

As a result, clearer and more accessible communication regarding the financial assessment and its impact could enhance transparency and public participation. Providing a detailed cost breakdown would help affected individuals and agencies better grasp the financial implications of their involvement in this process.