Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

72522

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 22, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
assumption that OPR would provide faster processing times. As noted in the draft rule, OPR will provide more flexibility for the renewal applicant, will improve the customer experience, and eliminate the added burden, time, and cost to the customer by providing the on-line option as an alternative to the mail in process. Processing times listed on www.travel.state.gov are still Department standard for all passport applications, physical and electronic.
Future expansion of OPR may allow for changes to expected service commitment times for online applications. The Department continuously strives to reduce passport processing service times through modernization initiatives.
One person suggested maintaining a walk-in passport agency in every U.S.
city with a population greater than 250,000. This is outside the scope of the proposed rule. However, the Department coordinates with a network of approximately 7,500 passport application acceptance facilities across the United States, all of which offer inperson service though they may be by appointment only, rather than offering walk-in service. The network of passport application acceptance facilities provides convenient, nationwide access.
Another commenter requested that the Department coordinate with USCIS
to automatically link the passport application to the naturalization process. This is outside the scope of the proposed rule. However, the Department regularly coordinates with USCIS to provide passport application acceptance services at naturalization ceremonies.

rule takes effect. Omnipoint Corp. v.
FCC, 316 U.S. App. D.C. 259, 78 F.3d 620, 630 D.C. Cir. 1996.
There is no requirement for anyone to adjust their behavior or prepare for anything prior to this rule going into effect. Those who do not wish to renew their passports using the online procedure still have the current DS82
available to them. The 30-day notice requirement of 553d is subject to the rule of prejudicial error. See 5
U.S.C. 706; Petaluma FX Partners, LLC
v. Commissioner, 416 U.S. App. D.C.
411, 420, 792 F.3d 72, 81 2015.
In addition, the Department is providing a benefit to the public by this rulemaking. The Department estimates that the online application will take approximately five minutes to complete, as opposed to 40 minutes for the DS82.
OPR saves up to three weeks for initial application processing that includes mailing and receipt at the lockbox facility as well as the candling fee processing, scanning, and batching of the applications for physical transmission to passport agencies.
Additionally, customers save time and money for transit to and from a post office for mailing, the price of an envelope, and either the cost of firstclass stamp or express mail feesof between $0.58 to $26.60 per application.
Use of OPR allows the customer to create and submit a digital application, upload their photograph, and make a payment via pay.gov from a computer or mobile device with no physical/paper application involved.
Therefore, the Department finds good cause to publish this rule without a delayed effective date under 5 U.S.C.
553d1 and 3.

Regulatory Findings
Regulatory Flexibility Act The Department of State certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule gives greater flexibility to applicants applying to renew their U.S. passport.

Administrative Procedure Act The Department published this rulemaking as a proposed rule and provided 60 days for public comment.
The Department finds good cause for the effective date to be less than 30 days from date of publication. As stated in American Bankers Assn v. NCUA, 38 F.
Supp. 2d 114, 13940 D.D.C. 1999, according to the legislative history of the APA, the purpose for deferring the effectiveness of a final rule under 553d was to afford persons affected a reasonable time to prepare for the effective date of a rule or rules or to take other action which the issuance may prompt. S. REP. NO. 79752, at 15
1946. In the same vein, the D.C. Circuit has explained that the purpose of the thirty-day waiting period is to give affected parties a reasonable time to adjust their behavior before the final
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:01 Dec 21, 2021

Jkt 256001

Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995
This final rule does not result in the expenditure by state, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any year and it does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
Therefore, no actions are necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995.
Congressional Review Act This rule is not a major rule as defined by the Congressional Review Act. This rule does not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100

PO 00000

Frm 00016

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.
Executive Order 12866
The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has designated this rule not significant under Executive Order 12866. As explained in the preamble and the APA section above, the benefits of the rule outweigh any costs to the public which the Department assesses will be minimal.
Executive Order 13132Federalism This rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to require consultations or warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372
regarding intergovernmental consultation on federal programs and activities do not apply to this regulation.
Executive Order 13175Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments The Department has determined that this rulemaking does not have tribal implications, does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal governments, and does not pre-empt tribal law. Accordingly, the requirements of Executive Order 13175
do not apply to this rulemaking.
Paperwork Reduction Act This rulemaking is related to the information collection described in OMB Control No. 14050020 Form DS
82. The web-based version of this form was approved in July 2021.
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 51
Passports.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, 22 CFR part 51 is amended as follows:
PART 51PASSPORTS
1. The authority citation for part 51
continues to read as follows:

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1504; 18 U.S.C. 1621;
22 U.S.C. 211a, 212, 212b, 213, 213n Pub.
L. 106113 Div. B, Sec. 1000a7 Div. A, Title II, Sec. 236, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A
430; 214, 214a, 217a, 218, 2651a, 2671d3, 2705, 2714, 2714a, 2721, & 3926; 26 U.S.C.
6039E; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 652k Div.
B, Title V of Pub. L. 103317, 108 Stat. 1760;
E.O. 11295, Aug. 6, 1966, FR 10603, 3 CFR, 19661970 Comp., p. 570; Pub. L. 114119, 130 Stat. 15; Sec. 1 of Pub. L. 109210, 120

E:FRFM22DER1.SGM

22DER1