ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers

Home Page

Advanced search

Immigration Daily


RSS feed

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board



Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation


CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network


Chinese Immig. Daily


Connect to us

Make us Homepage



Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily

The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of free

Immigration LLC.

Immigration Daily: the news source for
legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers
Enter your email address here:

< Back to current issue of Immigration Daily < Back to current issue of Immigrant's Weekly

[Federal Register: December 31, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 249)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 74169-74173]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access []



22 CFR Parts 22 and 51

[Public Notice: 6044]

Card Format Passport; Changes to Passport Fee Schedule

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Final rule.


SUMMARY: This rule finalizes the proposed rule published on October 17, 
2006, and implements certain provisions of Section 7209 of the 
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA). The 
IRTPA provides that United States citizens and nonimmigrant aliens may 
enter the United States only with passports or such alternative 
documents as the Secretary of Homeland Security may designate as 
satisfactorily establishing identity and citizenship. The statute 
requires that the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with 
the Secretary of State, develop and implement a plan to require 
virtually all travelers entering the United States to present a 
passport or other document or combination of documents that are deemed 
by the Secretary of Homeland Security to be sufficient to denote 
identity and citizenship. The legislation also requires that the 
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of State seek 
to facilitate the frequent travel of those living in border 
communities. This final rule takes into account the amendment to 
section 7209 by the 2007 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations 
Act calling for the availability of a passport card for land and sea 
travel between the United States and Canada, Mexico, the Caribbean and 
    The Administration's proposal to address the remainder of the 
legislative requirements in section 7209, called the Western Hemisphere 
Travel Initiative (WHTI), is being addressed in separate rulemakings.

DATES: This rule is effective February 1, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Consuelo Pachon, Office of Legal 
Affairs and Law Enforcement Liaison, Bureau of Consular Affairs, 2100 
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 3000, Washington, DC, telephone number 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department of State published an 
Advanced Notice of Proposed Rule Making (ANPRM) in September 2005, 
which received approximately 2,000 comments. Many of these comments 
from border resident communities expressed a desire for a less 
expensive and more portable alternative to the traditional passport 
book. To be responsive to the needs and concerns of the border 
communities and to facilitate the travel of border community residents, 
consistent with Section 7209, the Department of State issued a Notice 
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in October 2006, at 71 FR 60928, 
proposing to develop and issue a card format passport as a less 
expensive and more portable alternative to the passport book. The 
comment period closed on January 7, 2007. This final rule implements 
provisions of Section 7209 of the IRTPA, Public Law 108-458, 118 Stat. 
3638, 3823 (Dec. 17, 2004), as amended. The Administration's proposal 
to address the remainder of the legislative requirements of section 
7209 is being addressed in separate rulemakings.
    The rule was discussed in detail in Public Notice 5558, as were the 
Department of State's reasons for making the proposals. The Department 
of State is now promulgating a final rule with limited changes to 
clarify the proposed rule. Primarily, the final rule explains that the 
passport card does not need to be signed in order to be valid, whereas 
the passport book requires a signature to be valid. In addition, it 
makes clear that those requesting and eligible for a no-fee passport 
will receive a passport in book form only. The new Passport Card 
charges are summarized as follows:

[[Page 74170]]


9. Passport Card Services:
(a) Application fee for applicants age 16 or over (including         $20
 renewals) [Adult Passport Card]................................
(b) Application fee for applicants under age 16 [Minor Passport       10
(c) Passport card execution fee, (first time applicants only)...      25
    Total first time adult......................................      45
    Total first time child......................................      35
    Total renewal (adult).......................................      20
    Total renewal child.........................................      10

    The Department is making additional changes to the passport 
regulations at 22 CFR part 51 in a separate rulemaking. Those changes 
were published in the Federal Register on Monday November 19, 2007, 
will be effective February 1, 2008, and are contained in Public Notice 
5991, Vol. 22 Federal Register No. 222, pages 64930-64939.

Analysis of Comments

    Over 4000 comments were received regarding this proposed rule. 
Among those submitting comments were: four Members of Congress, 
Senators Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer of New York, Senator 
Patrick Leahy of Vermont, and Representative Louise Slaughter of New 
York; the governments of Canada and two of its provinces (Manitoba and 
New Brunswick); a Native American government (Haudenosaunee 
Confederation, New York); and dozens of city, county, and municipal 
governments. Also represented are the United States Postal Service 
(USPS), the Air Transport Association, over two dozen technology 
companies and privacy interest groups, five tourism interest groups, 
and three offshore drilling concerns.
    The vast majority of the comments were generated from an e-petition 
launched by Citizens Against Government Waste opposing the choice of 
technology. Independent of the e-petition, we received an additional 28 
comments regarding technology. In addition, over 150 comments voiced 
opposition to the change in the amount of the passport execution fee. 
Other key topics include security issues (21), privacy issues (18), and 
potential negative economic implications, including a decrease in 
tourism on both sides of the border (14). Only a small number of 
comments opposed the idea of the passport card itself, and over 20 
comments specifically voiced support for the passport card.
    Comments not specifically focused on the passport card are not 
discussed in this rule.


    All four Members of Congress, as well as technology, security, and 
privacy groups, are concerned with the choice of ``vicinity read'' 
radio frequency identification (RFID) technology for the passport card. 
While the majority of commenters opposed vicinity read technology, 
there were some commenters who supported the technology. The opinion 
expressed by many commenters is that vicinity read technology is not as 
secure as the proximity read technology currently used in the United 
States e-Passport. In their opinion the use of vicinity read technology 
could result in the unauthorized reading of information that would lead 
to identity theft and tracking of United States citizens by terrorists 
(security groups) and the government (privacy groups). In addition, 
commenters asserted that employing two different technologies at the 
same border crossing is redundant, inefficient, and unnecessarily 
costly. Several comments mention a 2006 Government Accountability 
Office review of the US-VISIT program, which reported a low read rate 
using this type of technology and a statement in the report that it 
should not be used for identification of people, only for the tracking 
of goods. All four Members of Congress also question the use of RFID 
vicinity read technology. Two members of Congress expressed concern 
that the passport card had not received National Institute of Standards 
and Technology (NIST) certification in accordance with Section 546 of 
the Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 207 (Pub. L. 109-295).
    The two comments that best represent the overall nature of comments 
regarding choice of technology come from the private sector. One 
industry association, whose members produce both vicinity read and 
proximity read technology, argues that vicinity read RFID technology is 
inappropriate for implementing a secure card that is used to verify a 
citizen's identity. A private company that designs, manufactures and 
markets both vicinity and proximity read technology chips commented 
that the choice of vicinity read technology could have the unexpected 
result of compromising the security of our borders while severely 
impacting the personal privacy of United States citizens. They also 
questioned whether vicinity read technology would necessarily improve 
border crossing times.
    While State and DHS appreciate the comments received, the vast 
majority reflected an improper understanding of the business model that 
WHTI is designed to meet and how the technology selected would actually 
be implemented. DHS remains committed to vicinity-read radio frequency 
identification (RFID) as the most appropriate technological solution to 
facilitate document processing at land and sea ports-of-entry. 
Vicinity-read RFID technology should allow CBP officers to quickly 
obtain information about the border crosser and perform terrorist watch 
list checks while they are still awaiting a personal inspection and to 
read multiple cards simultaneously. Therefore, to ensure compatibility 
and interoperability with the DHS border management system, and to 
secure significant travel facilitation advantages, the Department of 
State will produce the passport card utilizing vicinity RFID 
    The operational concept that this rule promulgates should enable 
information about a border crosser to be queued while they are awaiting 
their interviews with the border officers, rather than waiting until 
they are face to face with the officer to provide their personal 
information. This approach is designed to substantially reduce wait 
times at the border, which was the key driver in development of the 
WHTI passport card business case.
    The vicinity RFID electronic chip contains only one item of 
information--a unique identifying number that has meaning only inside 
the secure CBP computer system. No other form of personally 
identifiable information, such as name, date of birth, SSN, place of 
birth etc., will be electronically stored on the passport card or 
transmitted through RFID. All personal information will be contained in 
DHS systems and will only be accessible by authorized personnel through 
secure networks. Upon receipt of the passport card number, the border 
crosser's personal information will be downloaded from the CBP system 
and provided to the CBP officer. The CBP officer will then interview 
the individual, verify their identities, and determine the appropriate 
action to take. The WHTI passport card approach was not designed to be 
an automated system, and the use of vicinity RFID technology in this 
final rule reflects this reality. Rather, the RFID-based approach 
allows the CBP officers to do their jobs better and faster.
    While the passport card will transmit only the card's unique 
identifying number, which is meaningless outside the secure CBP 
computer system, the Department of State and DHS nonetheless take the 
submitted privacy concerns seriously. All card holders will

[[Page 74171]]

also be issued a protective sleeve for the card, which prevents 
transmission of the card's unique identifying number. Additionally, use 
of the passport card is not mandatory. Those border crossers that would 
prefer to use traditional passports may continue to do so.
    Many comments also discussed the technology solution in the e-
passport, whose business model is vastly different than that of WHTI. 
In the e-passport case, a different technology solution was selected 
that enables transfer of actual personal information in a secure, 
encrypted, manner. The technology solution for e-passports does not 
meet the business model for the specific WHTI application, so it was 
not selected.
    Section 546 of the Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2007 
(Pub. L. 109-295) requires the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology (NIST) to certify that ``the Departments of Homeland 
Security and State have selected a card architecture that meets or 
exceeds ISO security standards and meets or exceeds best available 
practices for protection of personal identification documents.'' NIST 
certified the proposed passport card on May 1, 2007. Both the House and 
Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Homeland Security received 
notice of the certification on May 3, 2007.

Passport Application Fees

    A limited number of commenters, most notably Senator Leahy, believe 
that the passport application fee, not just the execution fee, should 
be reduced. Senator Leahy also suggests that consideration should be 
given to waiving all fees to citizens with low incomes.
    The collection of passport application and execution fees is 
required by 22 U.S.C. 214. This section of the law mandates fee 
exemptions for specified groups, but does not allow the Department to 
establish an income-based waiver. The possibility of shorter periods of 
passport validity and less expensive passports for individuals, such as 
low-income applicants, has been proposed in the past. However, to date, 
Congress has not promulgated law that would give the Department of 
State authority to reduce or waive the passport fee for low-income 
citizens. Thus, a no-fee passport, regardless of format, for low-income 
citizens is not an option that is legally available.
    As established by OMB Circular A-25, fees for government services 
are to be based on the costs of service, in order to ensure that such 
services be self-sustaining to the extent possible. Thus, passport 
application fees are determined on a cost recovery basis and are 
intended to recover, to the extent possible, the costs of providing 
passport adjudication and production as well as consular services to 
citizen travelers abroad. The Department of State did not include the 
cost of consular services in determining the cost of the passport card, 
since travelers using the card are likely to be on cross border trips 
generally of short duration, and most emergencies would be handled by 
travelers relying on family members and services in the United States.

Passport Execution Fee

    We received comments from dozens of municipal and county 
governments, as well as the USPS, questioning the reduction of the 
execution fee from $30 to $25. USPS's comments acknowledge the positive 
relationship it shares with the Department of State and make clear that 
it will work with the Department to continue to offer passport 
acceptance services if the execution fee is lowered. USPS suggests that 
should the fee be lowered, the Department of State, in consultation 
with USPS, should provide both a more streamlined application process 
and conduct periodic reviews to ensure that the execution fee covers 
the cost of service. Comments also requested clarification of exactly 
when the execution fee is required.
    We note that only first-time applicants or those individuals 
required to appear personally at passport acceptance facilities are 
required to pay the execution fee. Individuals applying for renewal of 
a passport by mail, or those who have a passport book and are applying 
for a passport card, are not required to pay the execution fee.
    We also note that in the United States, the largest numbers of 
first-time passport applications are made by those who appear in person 
at a local United States Post Office or government office (most often 
county, township, municipal, or clerk of the court). The execution fee 
is retained by these designated passport application acceptance 
facilities to cover the costs of providing this service. We base the 
fee on a cost of service study designed to reimburse on an average 
basis, and conduct such studies regularly to ensure their accuracy in 
recovering relevant costs.
    The Department of State is committed to providing a low-cost 
alternative to the passport book to assist residents of border 
communities. Based on the considerations expressed in the NPRM, 
including our cost of service study, the Department of State will 
reduce the execution fee to $25.00 for the passport card. The 
Department of State values its significant national partnership with 
USPS and is also committed to working with USPS regarding any 
implementation issues that may be encountered with establishing this 
rate for the passport card execution fee. The Department of State is 
not proposing to lower the execution fee for the passport book at this 
time. Changes to the passport book fee schedule will be addressed in 
separate rulemakings.

First Nation Concerns

    The Department received one comment from the Haudenosaunee, a Six 
National Confederacy made up of the Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, 
Seneca, and Tuscarora Nations. They expressed concern that the proposed 
rule would unnecessarily and unintentionally interfere with and 
undermine the ability of the Haudenosaunee to determine how to document 
the identity and citizenship of its people. They also expressed concern 
that the proposed rule would interfere with aboriginal and treaty 
rights to freely pass the international border without burdensome 
costly documentation requirements.
    These issues will be addressed as part of the final WHTI joint rule 
making process by DHS and the Department of State. The Department of 
State is sensitive to the issues of documenting members of all United 
States Native American Nations. We would like to emphasize that the 
passport card will be issued on the same basis as the traditional 
passport book to Native Americans who wish to apply.

Washington State

    The Department of Licensing for the State of Washington commented 
that it strongly believes that enhanced driver's licenses would 
``better serve the economic and convenience needs'' of United States 
citizens at border crossings.
    The Department of State has participated in discussions between DHS 
and Washington State regarding the development of the Washington State 
Enhanced Driver's License Project, but is not a partner in the program. 
DHS has the authority to determine what documents or combination of 
documents it will deem sufficient to denote citizenship and identity 
for the purposes of cross border travel. The issue of alternative 
documentation will be addressed in the final rule implementing the land 
and sea portion of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative.

[[Page 74172]]

Canadian Comments

The Government of Canada
    The Government of Canada submitted official comments encouraging 
the movement of legitimate travelers across the shared border while 
still complying with WHTI. However, it expressed concern that unless 
the public is properly informed, there could be significant disruption 
to the tourism and service industries as well as to trade between the 
two countries. The Government of Canada encourages a high-profile 
outreach campaign regarding WHTI and the release of the passport card. 
It also urges that the implementation of WHTI be postponed until June 
1, 2009, and suggests that the use of the passport card be expanded to 
the air environment to increase its versatility, thus making it a more 
attractive option.
    The Department of State appreciates the comments expressed by the 
Government of Canada. For the past year, the Department of State and 
DHS have conducted an extensive public service campaign to educate the 
public on the requirements of WHTI. The success of this campaign is 
evidenced by the surge in passport applications through May 2007. We 
anticipate that this momentum will continue as we get closer to full 
    We note that the passport card, as currently designed and 
conceived, is for use at land and sea borders only. The passport card 
will be available to United States citizens nationwide, but its primary 
purpose is to facilitate the travel of those living in the border 
region. It is not a globally interoperable document. The Department of 
State continues to believe that it is a valuable low-cost alternative 
to the traditional book format passport.
Governments of Manitoba and New Brunswick
    The Government of Manitoba recommends (1) a delay in the 
implementation of WHTI; (2) development and funding for a public 
awareness campaign; (3) expansion of the trusted traveler and 
commercial traffic programs; (4) affordable documents; (5) flexibility 
of documentation, especially for minors under age 16; and, (6) 
exploration of the use of enhanced drivers' licenses as alternative 
travel documents provided for under WHTI. The Government of New 
Brunswick expressed concern about the implementation dates for WHTI and 
the lack of availability of NEXUS and FAST crossing sites at the Maine-
New Brunswick border. They call for launching unspecified required 
technologies and infrastructure at all border crossings.
    The Department of State welcomes comments from the Canadian 
provinces and shares their commitment to ensuring safe, affordable and 
efficient travel across common borders. We note, however, that the 
comments received are more directed toward the WHTI concept rather than 
the passport card. We will continue to work with DHS, Canadian 
provinces and the Canadian central government to assist in the 
implementation of WHTI and in the introduction of the passport card.

Global Interoperability of the Passport Card

    Several comments suggested that the passport card should not be 
restricted for use only at land borders but should be available for use 
in the air environment for travel between the United States, Canada, 
Mexico and the Caribbean.
    The passport card was specifically designed to respond to the 
concerns expressed by border communities in regard to the requirements 
of WHTI. The passport card is designed specifically to address the 
unique circumstances of land border crossings and is not intended to be 
a globally interoperable travel document. Therefore, passport cards 
will not be designed to meet the International Civil Aviation 
Organization (ICAO) standards and recommendations for globally 
interoperable passports.
    Because the passport card will be specifically designed to 
facilitate land and sea border crossings, it is not compatible with the 
global air environment, which is already set up for passport books. In 
addition, extending the use of the passport card to the air environment 
could create confusion with the traveling public should they attempt to 
use the passport card for travel to a country other than Mexico, Canada 
or the Caribbean.

Offshore Drilling Concerns

    Three offshore drilling concerns suggested that the passport card 
be made available for return to the United States by helicopter from a 
mobile offshore drilling unit (MODU).
    After careful consideration, the Department of State believes that 
even a limited use of the passport card in the air environment, such as 
helicopter travel from a MODU from outside the United States, back to 
the United States, would not be warranted. Travel of individuals 
working on a MODU attached to the Outer Continental Shelf is being 
addressed in the WHTI land and sea rulemaking.

Regulatory Findings

Administrative Procedure Act

    In accordance with provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act 
governing rules promulgated by federal agencies that affect the public 
(5 U.S.C. 552), the Department of State published a proposed rule and 
invited and received public comment.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department of State, in accordance with the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), has reviewed this regulation and, by 
approving it, certifies that this rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because only 
individuals can apply for the passport card.

Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995

    This rule does not involve a mandate that will 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 
will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, 
no actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

    This rule is not a major rule as defined by section 804 of the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Act of 1996. This rule will not 
result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 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 Department of State has reviewed this rule to ensure its 
consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in 
Executive Order 12866. The Department of State does not consider the 
proposed rule to be an economically significant regulatory action 
within the scope of section 3(f) (1) of the Executive Order since it is 
not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or 
more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of 
the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or 
communities. However, the final rule implements Department of State

[[Page 74173]]

decisions that require coordination with action taken or planned by 
another agency, in particular the Department of Homeland Security. 
Accordingly, the rule has been provided to the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) for review.

Executive Order 13132

    This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with section 6 
of Executive Order 13132, it is determined that this rule does not have 
sufficient federalism implications to require consultations or warrant 
the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not impose any new reporting or recordkeeping 
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 

List of Subjects

22 CFR Part 22

    Passports and visas.

22 CFR Part 51


Accordingly, 22 CFR Parts 22 and 51 are amended as follows:


1. The authority citation for part 22 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1153 note, 1351, 1351 note; 10 U.S.C. 
2602(c); 22 U.S.C. 214, 2504(a), 4201, 4206, 4215, 4219; 31 U.S.C. 
9701; Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681 et seq.; Pub. L. 108-447, 118 
Stat. 2809 et seq.; E.O. 10718, 22 FR 4632, 3 CFR, 1954-1958 Comp., 
p. 382; E.O. 11295, 31 FR 10603, 3 CFR, 1966-1970 Comp., p. 570.

2. Section 22.1 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  22.1  Schedule of fees.

* * * * *

                 Schedule of Fees for Consular Services
                    Item No.                                Fee
                    Passport and Citizenship Services

                                * * * * *
9. Passport Card Services:
    (a) Application fee for applicants age 16 or  $20
     over (including renewals) [Adult Passport
    (b) Application fee for applicants under age  10
     16 [Minor Passport Card].
    (c) Execution fee, (first time applicant      25
     only) [Passport Card].
10. [Reserved]..................................

                                * * * * *


3. The authority citation for part 51 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1504; 18 U.S.C. 1621; 22 U.S.C. 211a, 212, 
213, 213n (Pub. L. 106-113 Div. B, Sec. 1000(a)(7) [Div. A, Title 
II, Sec. 236], 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A-430); 214, 214a, 217a, 218, 
2651a, 2671(d)(3), 2705, 2714, 2721, & 3926; 26 U.S.C. 6039E; 31 
U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 652(k) [Div. B, Title V of Pub. L. 103-317, 
108 Stat. 1760]; E.O. 11295, Aug. 6, 1966, FR 10603, 3 CFR, 1966-
1970 Comp., p. 570; Sec. 1 of Pub. L. 109-210, 120 Stat. 319; Sec. 2 
of Pub. L. 109-167, 119 Stat. 3578; Sec. 5 of Pub. L. 109-472, 120 
Stat. 3554; Pub. L. 108-447, Div. B, Title IV, Dec. 8, 2004, 118 
Stat. 2809; Pub. L. 108-458, 118 Stat. 3638, 3823 (Dec. 17, 2004).

4. Amend Sec.  51.3 by adding a new paragraph (d) to read as follows:

Sec.  51.3  Types of passports.

* * * * *
    (d) Passport card. A passport card is issued to a national of the 
United States on the same basis as a regular passport. It is valid only 
for departure from and entry to the United States through land and sea 
ports of entry between the United States and Mexico, Canada, the 
Caribbean and Bermuda. It is not a globally interoperable international 
travel document.

5. Section 51.4, paragraphs (a) and (b) are revised to read as follows:

Sec.  51.4  Validity of passports.

    (a) Signature of bearer. A passport book is valid only when signed 
by the bearer in the space designated for signature, or, if the bearer 
is unable to sign, signed by a person with legal authority to sign on 
his or her behalf. A passport card is valid without the signature of 
the bearer.
    (b) Period of validity of a regular passport and a passport card.
    (1) A regular passport or passport card issued to an applicant 16 
years of age or older is valid for ten years from date of issue unless 
the Department limits the validity period to a shorter period.
    (2) A regular passport or passport card issued to an applicant 
under 16 years of age is valid for five years from date of issue unless 
the Department limits the validity period to a shorter period.
    (3) A regular passport for which payment of the fee has been 
excused is valid for a period of five years from the date issued unless 
limited by the Department to a shorter period.
* * * * *

6. Section 51.52 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  51.52  Exemption from payment of passport fees.

    (a) A person who is exempt from the payment of passport fees under 
this section may obtain a passport book only for no charge. A passport 
card will not be issued for no charge to the individuals exempt from 
the payment of passport fees under this section.
    (b) The following persons are exempt from payment of passport fees 
except for the passport execution fee, unless their applications are 
executed before a federal official, in which case they are also exempt 
from payment of the passport execution fee:
    (1) An officer or employee of the United States traveling on 
official business and the members of his or her immediate family. The 
applicant must submit evidence of the official purpose of the travel 
and, if applicable, authorization for the members of his or her 
immediate family to accompany or reside with him or her abroad.
    (2) An American seaman who requires a passport in connection with 
his or her duties aboard a United States flag vessel.
    (3) A widow, widower, child, parent, brother or sister of a 
deceased member of the United States Armed Forces proceeding abroad to 
visit the grave of such service member or to attend a funeral or 
memorial service for such member.
    (4) Other persons whom the Department determines should be exempt 
from payment of passport fees for compelling circumstances, pursuant to 
guidance issued by the Department; or
    (5) Other categories of persons exempted by law.

    Dated: December 21, 2007.
Patrick Kennedy,
Under Secretary for Management, Department of State.
 [FR Doc. E7-25422 Filed 12-28-07; 8:45 am]

Immigration Daily: the news source for
legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers
Enter your email address here: