FR 2021-00771

The document from the Federal Register, issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), is a request for public comment on proposed revisions to the Application for Naturalization. The purpose of this request is to collect feedback from the public and other federal agencies, as mandated by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This initiative aims to refine the naturalization application process, and stakeholders are encouraged to evaluate the necessity, accuracy, quality, and burden of the information collection process. Comments are open for a period of 60 days, allowing a broad audience to participate using the Federal eRulemaking Portal.

General Summary

The document serves as a formal notice inviting the public to provide input on proposed changes to the Form N-400, which is the application for U.S. citizenship through naturalization. This review process is crucial for ensuring that the collection of information serves its purpose effectively without imposing unnecessary burdens on applicants. DHS and USCIS are particularly interested in assessing whether the information collected is practical and useful, whether it minimizes the time and cost burdens on applicants, and whether the process can be improved through increased clarity and better methods of submission.

Significant Issues

There are several notable issues within the document:

1. Inconsistent Data: The number of respondents for the N-400 information collection is reported inconsistently. The document lists '393,671' and '7836,663' as the number of respondents, which appears contradictory and may be the result of typographical errors.

2. Complex Language: The bureaucratic language used, particularly in the "Overview of This Information Collection" section, may be difficult for the general public to understand, potentially reducing the effectiveness of the request for public commentary.

3. Privacy Concerns: While the document acknowledges that submissions will be made public, the explanation of privacy implications could be clearer. This is important so that respondents fully understand the potential public nature of their contributions.

4. High Burden Estimate: The estimated public burden, noted at over 10 million hours, seems excessively high. Such a figure may suggest either significant respondent overburdening or an error in calculations. This raises concerns about the efficiency and feasibility of the process for respondents.

5. Lack of Cost Transparency: The document mentions an estimated cost burden without offering a detailed breakdown or explanation, potentially raising questions about resource allocation and transparency in financial estimations.

Impact on the Public

The proposed document revisions aim to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the naturalization process. However, the perceived complexity and potential inaccuracies may deter some stakeholders from engaging, particularly if they find the process overwhelming. The high estimates for time and cost burdens may also discourage prospective applicants who might see these factors as barriers to naturalization.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

For applicants, the document's issues may represent both barriers and opportunities. On one hand, if the revisions lead to a streamlined process with reduced costs and shorter processing times, applicants stand to benefit significantly. On the other hand, the current lack of clarity and high burden estimates might generate confusion or concern, prompting potential applicants to seek further clarification before proceeding.

For advocacy groups and legal professionals working with immigrants, this notice represents an opportunity to influence the naturalization process. By responding to this call for comments, such stakeholders can advocate for improvements that directly address the pain points identified, thus leading to a more applicant-friendly process.

In summary, while the document's intention to seek public input is commendable, addressing the mentioned issues proactively will be essential for ensuring a meaningful and effective revision of the naturalization application process. Stakeholders are encouraged to engage with the process, focusing on clarifying ambiguities and advocating for practical enhancements.