U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

89–010 

" ! SENATE 

111TH CONGRESS

1st Session 

REPORT

2009

111–104 

Calendar No. 217 

PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL SECURITY IN 

STATES’ IDENTIFICATION ACT OF 2009 

R E P O R T 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

TO ACCOMPANY

S. 1261 

TO REPEAL TITLE II OF THE REAL ID ACT OF 2005 AND AMEND 

TITLE II OF THE HOMELAND SECURITY ACT OF 2002 TO BETTER 

PROTECT THE SECURITY, CONFIDENTIALITY, AND INTEGRITY OF 

PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION COLLECTED BY 

STATES WHEN ISSUING DRIVER’S LICENSES AND IDENTIFICATION DOCUMENTS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

DECEMBER 9, 2009.—Ordered to be printed 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTSE:\Seals\Congress.#13
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman 

CARL LEVIN, Michigan 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

JON TESTER, Montana 

ROLAND W. BURRIS, Illinois 

PAUL G. KIRK, JR., Massachusetts 

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio 

JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina 

ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah 

MICHAEL L. ALEXANDER, Staff Director 

KEVIN J. LANDY, Chief Counsel 

DEBORAH P. PARKINSON, Professional Staff Member 

EVAN W. CASH, Professional Staff Member, Subcommittee on Oversight of Government 

Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia 

BRANDON L. MILHORN, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

JOHN K. GRANT, Minority Counsel 

TARA L. SHAW, MINORITY COUNSEL, SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT OF GOVERNMENT

MANAGEMENT, THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE, AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

TRINA DRIESSNACK TYRER, Chief Clerk 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
Calendar No. 217 

111TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 111–104 

PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL SECURITY IN STATES’ 

IDENTIFICATION ACT OF 2009 

DECEMBER 9, 2009.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. LIEBERMAN, from the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 1261] 

The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 

to which was referred the bill (S. 1261) to repeal title II of the 

REAL ID Act of 2005 and amend title II of the Homeland Security 

Act of 2002 to better protect the security, confidentiality, and integrity of personally identifiable information collected by States when 

issuing driver’s licenses and identification documents, and for other 

purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon 

with an amendment and recommends that the bill do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

I. Purpose and Summary .................................................................................. 1 

II. Background and Need for the Legislation ................................................... 2 

III. Legislative History ......................................................................................... 15 

IV. Section-by-Section Analysis .......................................................................... 16 

V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact .................................................................. 20 

VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ................................................ 20 

VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ........................... 25 

I. PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

The purpose of S. 1261 is to replace existing minimum standards 

for States’ issuance of driver’s licenses and identification cards that 

can be used as identification for certain federal official purposes in 

order to decrease the cost and increase the practicality of issuing 

secure identification. S. 1261 would replace Title II of the REAL ID 

Act of 2005 (P.L. 109–13) with new drivers license and identification card standards. It would also amend the Drivers Privacy Protection Act (P.L. 103–322) to set new conditions under which nonVerDate Nov 24 2008 04:00 Dec 13, 2009 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR104.XXX SR104

smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
2 

1 9/11 Commission Report, p. 390. 

2Public Law 108–458, Section 7212 (Repealed). 

governmental entities could read and use information stored on the 

machine-readable component of a driver’s license or identification 

card. 

II. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION

The issuance of driver’s licenses and State identification cards 

has long been left to the discretion of State and local governments. 

As a result, Americans face a patchwork of diverse policies governing who qualifies for a driver’s license, how an individual proves 

his or her identity when applying for a license, and the physical appearance and construction of the card. Any coordination among the 

States has been done through voluntary efforts by the departments 

of motor vehicles (DMVs) themselves. 

9/11 COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 

The need for federal intervention in the issuance protocols for 

State driver’s licenses and identification cards was raised in 2004 

by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United 

States (9/11 Commission), which recommended that the federal 

government set standards for the issuance of identification documents, such as driver’s licenses. This recommendation was based 

on the finding that 

All but one of the 9/11 hijackers acquired some form of 

U.S. identification document, some by fraud. Acquisition of 

these forms of identification would have assisted them in 

boarding commercial flights, renting cars, and other necessary activities. . . . Fraud in identification documents is 

no longer just a problem of theft. At many entry points to 

vulnerable facilities, including gates for boarding aircraft, 

sources of identification are the last opportunity to ensure 

that people are who they say they are and to check whether they are terrorists.1

PREVIOUS LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS AT ESTABLISHING UNIFORM

IDENTIFICATION STANDARDS

In response to the 9/11 Commission Report, Congress passed the 

Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA; 

P.L. 108–458), which among other things, required the Secretary of 

Transportation, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, to issue regulations with respect to minimum standards for 

federal acceptance of driver’s licenses and identification cards 

through a negotiated rulemaking among DOT and DHS representatives, State officials, and other interested parties. Under Section 

7212 of IRTPA, no federal agency would be permitted to accept a 

State issued identification card unless it conformed to the minimum standards. 

IRTPA directed its regulations to include minimum applicant 

documentation standards, procedures for document verification, requirements for the card contents, and standards for application 

processing.2 It also mandated privacy protections for those who 

apply for and hold such identification. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
3 

3Public Law 109–13, Division B—The REAL ID Act of 2005. 

The negotiated rulemaking committee had met only once before 

Congress passed the REAL ID Act of 2005 as part of the 2005 

Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief (P.L. 109–13). The REAL ID 

Act repealed Section 7212 of IRTPA and replaced the negotiated 

rulemaking provision with a stricter set of federal requirements for 

the issuance of driver’s licenses and identification cards.3 The 

REAL ID Act was inserted into P.L. 109–13 during the House-Senate conference; the Senate did not independently consider or vote 

on the REAL ID Act as either a bill or an amendment to a bill. 

Moreover, neither the House nor the Senate held hearings on the 

REAL ID Act prior to its enactment. 

Title II of the REAL ID Act of 2005 requires that, beginning on 

May 11, 2008, federal agencies may accept only State issued driver’s licenses and identification cards that are compliant with the 

requirements of the Act as proof of identification for certain federal 

purposes, including—but not limited to—boarding an airplane, accessing a nuclear facility, or entering a federal building. Before 

issuing a compliant document, a state must verify the issuance, validity, and completeness of: (1) a photo identification document or 

a non-photo document containing both the individual’s full legal 

name and date of birth; (2) the individual’s date of birth; (3) the 

individual’s social security number (SSN) or verification of the individual’s ineligibility for a SSN; and (4) name and address of the individual’s principle residence. In addition, the Act requires States 

to provide electronic access to the information contained in other 

States’ driver’s license databases. 

The REAL ID Act also requires States to verify an applicant’s 

legal status in the United States before issuing a compliant driver’s 

license or identification card and adopt procedures and practices to: 

(1) employ technology to capture digital images of identity source 

documents; (2) retain paper copies of source documents for a minimum of seven years or images of source documents presented for 

a minimum of ten years; (3) take a picture of each applicant; (4) 

establish an effective procedure to confirm or verify a renewing applicant’s information; (5) confirm with the Social Security Administration a SSN presented by a person using the full Social Security 

account number; (6) refuse issuance of a driver’s license or identification card to a person holding a driver’s license issued by another State without confirmation that the person is terminating or 

has terminated the driver’s license; (7) ensure the physical security 

of locations where cards are produced and the security of document 

materials and papers from which driver’s licenses and identification cards are produced; (8) subject all persons authorized to manufacture or produce driver’s licenses and identification cards to appropriate security clearance requirements; (9) establish fraudulent 

document recognition training programs for appropriate employees 

engaged in the issuance of driver’s licenses and identification cards; 

and (10) limit the length of time a driver’s license or identification 

card is valid to eight years. The REAL ID Act did not require any 

protection of personally identifiable information. 

A September 2006 report issued by the National Governors Association (NGA), the National Conference of State Legislatures 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
4 

4The Real ID Act: National Impact Analysis (September 2006). 

5 72 Fed. Reg. 10820 (March 9, 2007). 

6 73 Fed. Reg. 5272 (January 29, 2008). 

7See Id. at p. 5272–5340. 

(NCSL), and the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA), based on a nation-wide survey of State DMVs, 

concluded that compliance with the REAL ID Act would cost States 

more than $11 billion over five years, would have a negative impact on DMV services, and would impose unrealistic burdens on 

States.4

On March 1, 2007, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which was published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2007.5 The proposed 

rule sought to implement each of the REAL ID Act’s mandates. The 

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) estimated that the proposed rule would cost States $14.6 billion over 10 years. 

After receiving numerous comments on the NPRM, including concerns regarding cost, schedule, and lack of privacy protections, 

DHS issued a final rule implementing Title II of the REAL ID Act 

on January 29, 2008.6 The final rule, which differed significantly 

from the NPRM, required that States use certain federal databases 

for verification purposes, set minimum standards for State motor 

vehicle databases, check with other States to determine if compliant identification had been issued in any other State, complete security plans, and physically secure identification issuance facilities. 

These regulations addressed some of the timing and cost concerns 

with REAL ID by offering a series of deadline extensions to States 

demonstrating progress in meeting REAL ID requirements and allowing a phased issuance of licenses and identification cards to different segments of the population. OMB estimated the cost of the 

final rule to States to be $3.9 billion over ten years.7

For all practical purposes, the final rule effectively disregards the 

law’s May 11, 2008, deadline. Instead it used the waiver authority 

granted to the Secretary under REAL ID to put in its place a series 

of deadlines, each requiring States to demonstrate a certain level 

of compliance with REAL ID. First, States were allowed to request 

from DHS an extension until December 31, 2009, by submitting a 

written statement attesting to the State’s intent to comply with 

REAL ID. However, in reality, a number of States were granted extensions based on a promise to improve driver’s license security in 

general, as opposed to a specific commitment to comply with REAL 

ID. Second, the rule stated that States that could demonstrate ‘‘material compliance’’ with REAL ID by October 2009 would be granted an additional extension until May 10, 2011, to begin issuing 

fully compliant licenses. ‘‘Material compliance’’ is defined to mean 

meeting a series of 18 benchmarks laid out by DHS in the final 

rule. By May 11, 2011, all States must be compliant with REAL 

ID for the issuance of all new licenses. The regulations provide for 

a phased-in, risk-based issuance such that individuals born after 

December 1, 1964, be issued REAL-ID compliant driver’s licenses 

by December 1, 2014, and that all license holders seeking compliant licenses have them by December 1, 2017. 

If at any point a State does not meet one of the extension criteria, the full weight of the REAL ID Act takes effect, and no liVerDate Nov 24 2008 02:16 Dec 13, 2009 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR104.XXX SR104

smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
5 

8Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia Hearing on Understanding the Realities of REAL ID: A Review of Efforts to Secure Drivers’ Licenses and Identification Cards (S. Hrg. 110–291), March 26, 2007. 

censes issued by that State may be used to prove identity for federal purposes, including boarding a commercial airplane. 

COMMITTEE CONSIDERS OPTIONS

The Committee (HSGAC), including its Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the 

District of Columbia (OGM), has held three hearings exploring the 

implementation of the REAL ID Act since that law’s enactment. In 

addition, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the 

REAL ID Act on May 8, 2007. 

On March 26, 2007, the OGM Subcommittee held a hearing on 

the NPRM entitled, Understanding the Realities of REAL ID: A Review of Efforts to Secure Drivers’ Licenses and Identification 

Cards.8 Witnesses included Richard C. Barth, Assistant Secretary 

for Policy Development, DHS; Leticia Van de Putte, Texas State 

Senator representing NCSL; Mufi Hannemann, Mayor of Honolulu, 

Hawaii; David Quam, Director of Federal Relations, NGA; Timothy 

Sparapani, Legislative Counsel, American Civil Liberties Union 

(ACLU); and Jim Harper, Director for Information Policy Studies, 

CATO Institute. 

On April 29, 2008, the OGM Subcommittee held a second hearing 

entitled The Impact of Implementation: A Review of the REAL ID 

Act and the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative. This hearing examined the views of stakeholders on the final regulations, and explored the challenges that remained in implementation of REAL 

ID. The witnesses at that hearing were: Stewart A. Baker, Assistant Secretary for Policy, DHS; Derwood K. Staeben, Senior Advisor, Department of State; Donna Stone, President, NCSL; David 

Quam, Director of Federal Relations, NGA; Caroline Fredrickson, 

Director of the Washington Legislative Office, ACLU; Roger J. 

Dow, Chief Executive Officer, Travel Industry Association; Angelo 

I. Amador, Director of Immigration Policy, U.S. Chamber of Commerce; and Sophia Cope, Staff Attorney, Center for Democracy and 

Technology (CDT). 

On July 15, 2009, the Committee held a hearing entitled Identification Security: Reevaluating the Real ID Act, which focused on 

the PASS ID Act. Witnesses included: Janet Napolitano, Secretary 

of Homeland Security; Jim Douglas, Governor of Vermont; Stewart 

A. Baker, former Assistant Secretary for Policy, DHS; Leroy D. 

Baca, Sheriff, Los Angeles County; David Quam, Director of Federal Relations, NGA; and Ari Schwartz, Vice President and Chief 

Operating Officer, Center for Democracy and Technology. 

At these hearings, many witnesses called for repealing REAL ID 

and replacing it with more workable standards. Witnesses opposing 

REAL ID cited cost, time constraints, lack of the necessary federal 

electronic systems, refusal of multiple States to comply, and privacy concerns as reasons to contemplate a new proposal. 

A number of states have passed resolutions denouncing the 

REAL ID Act. Furthermore, to date, fifteen States have enacted 

laws prohibiting compliance with REAL ID, and several others 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
6 

9Those states with laws prohibiting compliance with REAL ID are Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, 

Idaho, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Oregon, 

South Carolina, Virginia, and Washington. 10See Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight of 

Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia Hearing on Understanding the Realities of REAL ID: A Review of Efforts to Secure Drivers’ Licenses and Identification Cards (S. Hrg. 110–291), p. 26–27, March 26, 2007. 11 Id. at p. 22–23. 

have anti-REAL ID legislation pending.9 Unless these States reverse the legislation, residents of these States will not have compliant identification required for official federal purposes. However, 

the legislatures in most States only meet every two years, meaning 

that if a State legislature did want to repeal existing anti-REAL ID 

laws there could be a significant time delay before they are able. 

The most urgent practical repercussion of this State rejection of 

REAL ID is that as of December 31 of this year, millions of Americans will not be able to use their State driver’s license or identification card to board an airplane, unless the Secretary further exercises the waiver authority provided under the REAL ID Act. At a 

minimum, this will cause the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to perform more extensive screening procedures, potentially including secondary screening, on the vast majority of passengers that travel through certain airports, greatly inconveniencing passengers and causing the air travel industry to lose revenue. The worst case scenario is that TSA simply cannot handle 

the additional screening burden and many of these individuals are 

unable to board commercial flights all together. 

To address the concerns with REAL ID and avoid significant air 

travel disruptions at the end of this year, the PASS ID Act (S. 

1261) was introduced by Senators Daniel Akaka, George Voinovich, 

Patrick Leahy, Jon Tester, Max Baucus, and Thomas Carper on 

June 15, 2009 to address these concerns while still ensuring a 

heightened level of security in drivers licenses and state-issued 

identification cards. The following sections discuss the major concerns with REAL ID identified in the Committee’s hearings and 

how PASS ID would address those issues. 

COST AND PRACTICALITY

States have repeatedly raised the REAL ID Act’s high implementation costs as one of their primary concerns with the law. At 

OGM’s 2007 hearing, David Quam, Director of Federal Relations at 

NGA, testified that the $11 billion in implementation costs, as estimated by NGA, NCSL and AAMVA, would have a major adverse 

effect on State-offered public services. According to Mr. Quam, 

many of the law’s provisions would impose significant costs on the 

States, which would have to take on additional staff to compress 

their regular renewal cycles for issuing licenses; rework the physical processes for issuing licenses; ensure digital storage of all 

source documentation; upgrade and interlink State databases; and 

establish connections to Federal electronic databases.10 The Honorable Leticia Van de Putte, Texas State Senator and President of 

NCSL, echoed those concerns at the same hearing, emphasizing the 

burden that the costs and implementation timeline would create.11

After DHS issued its final regulations, DHS Assistant Secretary 

for Policy Stewart Baker testified in April 2008 that the final regulations reduced the cost to the States from the $14.6 billion estiVerDate Nov 24 2008 02:16 Dec 13, 2009 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR104.XXX SR104

smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
7 

12Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia Hearing on The Impact of Implementation: A Review of the REAL ID Act and the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (S. Hrg. 110–555), p. 63, April 29, 2008. 13 Id. at p. 36. 14 Id. at p. XX. 15Testimony of David Quam, Director, Office of Federal Relations, National Governors Association before Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, July 15, 

2009. 16Testimony of Leticia Van de Putte, Texas State Senator before Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, March 26, 2007. 17Division of Motor Vehicles, State of Arizona, http://www.dmv.com/az/arizona/drivers-license. 

mated for the NPRM’s proposal to $3.9 billion. This 73 percent reduction from the NPRM was achieved, according to DHS, by giving 

States more flexibility in security requirements and timing.12 However, NGA disagreed with that savings estimate. For example, according to NGA DHS assumed that only 75 percent of all drivers 

would choose to receive a REAL ID, while the States estimated 

that this figure could be substantially higher, particularly if States 

decline to offer their residents an alternative license that is not 

REAL ID compliant.13

States view REAL ID as an unfunded mandate, and the majority 

of governors and State legislators have maintained the position 

that the federal government should bear the majority of implementation costs. To date, the Department of Homeland Security has 

awarded approximately $140 million to States to implement the requirements of REAL ID, with another $50 million appropriated for 

FY 2010.14 DHS has also allowed States to reallocate up to 20 percent of their State Homeland Security Program grants for REAL ID 

implementation since FY 2007; however, States note that those 

funds are already committed to other pressing homeland security 

projects and have generally been unavailable for REAL ID. 

NGA has estimated that PASS ID would cut in nearly half the 

implementation costs to States by granting additional flexibility, 

modifying requirements and eliminating fees for federal databases, 

and allowing for date-forward renewals to distribute compliant licenses and identification cards, meaning that States would be 

given a date when they are required to begin issuing compliant licenses as opposed to a date when all residents must possess a compliant license.15

RENEWAL CYCLE

One significant cost driver for States is the requirement to issue 

compliant driver’s licenses and identification cards to all current 

card holders in person and within a condensed timeframe. The 

original NPRM for the REAL ID Act would have required that 

States reissue all driver’s licenses and identification cards no later 

than May 11, 2013. States expressed concern over the disruption 

that they would face to their regular renewal cycles under this 

timeframe. At the 2007 OGM hearing, Texas State Senator Van de 

Putte said that implementing REAL ID under the NPRM would 

have required approximately 741 additional full time positions and 

18 additional facilities in the State of Texas alone.16

Most States currently reissue driver’s licenses every 5 to 10 

years, though at least one State issues licenses that are valid for 

65 years.17 Additionally, all States rely on mail-in and online appliVerDate Nov 24 2008 02:16 Dec 13, 2009 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR104.XXX SR104

smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
8 

18 73 Fed. Reg. 5275 (January 29, 2008). 19Testimony of the Honorable Jim Douglas, Director, Governor, State of Vermont before Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, July 15, 2009. 20Public Law 109–13, Division B—The REAL ID Act of 2005. 

cation processes to facilitate a significant percentage of renewals. 

REAL ID thus will not only require a number of States to accelerate their existing schedules; it also will require them to do so 

while issuing and reissuing licenses in person. Both of these factors 

require additional staff and, therefore, impose significant new 

costs. 

To try to address those concerns, the final rule provided for a 

phased enrollment period, whereby States would be required to 

issue new licenses to all residents under the age of 50 by December 

1, 2014. States would have until December 1, 2017 to enroll individuals over the age of 50. 

DHS justified these staggered deadlines by citing statistical analysis finding that ‘‘persons over the age of 50 were less likely to be 

involved in TSA-related law enforcement incidents involving false 

or fraudulent identification.’’ 18 However, the Governors argued 

that this change did not go far enough. At the July 2009 HSGAC 

hearing, Vermont Governor Jim Douglas argued for further flexibilities. Meeting this deadline, he explained, would still require 

States to alter existing timetables for driver’s license re-issuance 

and significantly increase costs to the States.19

PASS ID would allow States to begin issuing compliant licenses 

more in line with their current renewal cycle by requiring compliance with PASS ID for all new or renewed licenses issued one year 

or more after the effective date of interim regulations promulgated 

pursuant to PASS ID. At the same time, the bill accelerates the enrollment process by requiring States to complete the process in five 

years, at which point all license holders must possess a PASS ID 

compliant license to use it for federal purposes. So, for example, if 

S. 1261 becomes law during the 111th Congress, all States would 

be fully compliant with PASS ID before 2017, the current REAL ID 

completion date. 

The Committee believes this compromise appropriately balances 

the States’ need for flexibility with the national interest in achieving secure identification documents expeditiously. 

AVAILABILITY OF MANDATED TECHNOLOGIES

REAL ID requires States to verify the source documents, or the 

essential information contained on the source documents, with the 

issuing agency. For example, the validity of a Social Security number would need to be verified with the Social Security Administration. The most feasible way to obtain this verification is through 

the use of electronic systems and databases. Otherwise, verification 

would have to be done by telephone or mail, which could substantially lengthen the application and issuance process. In order to 

comply with REAL ID, a State would need to access five separate 

electronic systems.20

Currently, only two of the five systems required by REAL ID are 

fully developed and nationally deployed—the Systematic Alien 

Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system, administered by U.S. 

Citizenship and Immigration Services at DHS, and the Social SecuVerDate Nov 24 2008 02:16 Dec 13, 2009 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR104.XXX SR104

smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
9 

21 Baker Testimony, p. 5. 22Statement of the National Association for Public Health Statistics and Information Systems 

for the Record Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, July 15, 

2009. 

rity On-Line Verification (SSOLV) system, administered by the Social Security Administration. 

The third system, the Electronic Verification of Vital Events 

Records (EVVE) system, which would be used to verify birth certificates, has yet to be fully populated and deployed and will cost 

States millions of dollars to ensure all birth records are electronically accessible and accurate. According to testimony submitted for 

the Committee’s July 2009 hearing record from the National Association of Public Health Statistics and Information Systems, which 

administers EVVE, only three State DMVs are currently online 

with EVVE. The system currently contains partial birth record information for 15 States, but the system requires additional work to 

input and confirm records to improve reliability and accuracy.21

Once State vital records offices are connected to EVVE, State 

DMVs must make the necessary investments and system adjustments to gain access to the database. Estimates suggest that it will 

cost States at least $150 million to complete the necessary work 

and allow the effective utilization of EVVE as part of the driver’s 

license and identification card application process.22 There is no 

way to determine when EVVE will be fully deployed to all 50 

States and contain the necessary vital records. 

The other two required electronic systems are: a system that connects to the State Department to verify passport information, 

which does not currently exist; and a system connecting each of the 

State DMVs to allow States to check for duplicate licenses. In addition to privacy concerns raised over these interlinking databases 

and the costs associated with States enabling such information 

sharing, no electronic system has been developed to connect the 

motor vehicle records of all 50 States. A pilot program, using funds 

provided by DHS to the State of Mississippi, is currently underway 

to develop and test the State-to-State connectivity, but it is unclear 

when it will be completed and available to the States. 

Governors and State legislators object to being required to use 

electronic systems that are not currently available and many over 

which they have no control. At the Committee’s 2007 hearing, Ms. 

Van de Putte of NCSL testified, ‘‘It is critical that States not be required to electronically verify the validity of identification documents with the issuing agency until the necessary verification systems have been developed, tested and made available nationwide.’’ 

The PASS ID Act requires the presentation of the same documentation to State DMVs as required under REAL ID. Where there 

are existing functional databases, such as the federal databases for 

verifying immigration status and social security numbers, as discussed above, States will be required to use them. 

However, where there is no practical way to verify documents, 

the verification requirement is substituted for a validation requirement. This means that a person with fraudulent document training 

must examine the document to determine its authenticity, as the 

State Department does with birth certificates when it issues passports. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
10 

23 Baker Testimony, p. 4. 24 E-mail from Legislative Affairs, DHS, to Majority Staff, Committee on Homeland Security 

and Governmental Affairs (November 18, 2009). 

As introduced, PASS ID would have required the validation, 

rather than verification, of birth certificates, because the EVVE 

system is not fully populated with data and is operational only in 

three States’ DMVs. At the 2009 HSGAC hearing, former Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Stewart Baker raised concerns 

over the exclusion of electronic verification requirements for birth 

certificates in the PASS ID Act.23 Subsequently, the Committee addressed this concern as part of a Lieberman-Collins-Voinovich substitute amendment, which included provisions to phase in the use 

of the birth certificate verification database. As amended, PASS ID 

would require that birth certificate information be electronically 

verified through the EVVE system no later than 6 years after the 

date of enactment, provided that the Secretary of Homeland Security has certified that the EVVE system is functioning and has access to all States’ electronic birth records. This provision will remove REAL ID’s impractical requirement of using a system that 

has not yet been implemented nationwide and will enhance security by ensuring that States eventually use the system. Once the 

Secretary has certified that EVVE has been sufficiently developed, 

States would be required to utilize the system for any individual 

that has applied for a compliant driver’s license or identification 

card and has not previously had his or her birth certificate verified. 

Additionally, to address concerns with the costs of fully implementing EVVE, the substitute amendment establishes a grant program for States to digitize birth information, link that data to 

death records, and electronically verify birth certificate information. The bill also requires that any State accepting these grants 

certify that all birth records in that State will be digitized and accurate within three years of receiving the grant. 

The PASS ID Act would also codify the established pilot program 

for State-to-State driver’s license information sharing with the goal 

of evaluating the feasibility of such an electronic system, its costs, 

and the necessary governance structure to ensure security and privacy. This would help States develop and evaluate a mechanism for 

sharing electronic information to verify the existence of a single 

compliant driver’s license or identification card in which States 

could choose to participate. The Committee encourages States to 

participate in this program and work collaboratively with DHS to 

expand inter-State DMV information sharing capabilities. 

CHARGES FOR USE OF EXISTING FEDERAL DATABASES

Under the REAL ID Act, States must use the Systematic Alien 

Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database from DHS to verify 

immigration status and the Social Security Online Verification 

(SSOLV) database from the Social Security Administration to 

verify Social Security numbers. Currently, States must pay transactional fees in order to use these databases, which DHS estimates 

will cost States $56.8 million over 11 years.24

The Committee has determined that the use of these databases 

is a necessary component of identification security. However, the 

Federal government, rather than States, should fund the use of 

these federal databases to comply with a federal law. Therefore, 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
11 

25Statement of Ari Schwartz, Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Center for Democracy and Technology before Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 

July 15, 2009 (hereafter ‘‘Schwartz Testimony’’), at p. 2. 

the PASS ID Act specifies that States shall not be charged transaction fees for the use of federal electronic systems to implement 

this Act. Congress will need to appropriate additional resources in 

the future in order to fund the use of these databases by every 

State. 

INFORMATION STORAGE AND PHYSICAL SECURITY REQUIREMENTS

Additional areas of high cost under REAL ID are the requirements to electronically store copies of applicants’ identity documents and to ensure the physical security of DMV facilities. The 

requirement to electronically store information requires investments in both storage capacity and the modification of information 

technology systems. The physical security requirements have posed 

challenges for States, in part due to the late release of more specific information and guidance from DHS. Although REAL ID was 

enacted in 2005 and DHS issued its final rule in January 2008, 

DHS did not release the guidelines for physical security requirements until February 2009, giving States little time to assess the 

vulnerabilities of their facilities and to determine the best means 

of enhancing security where necessary. Some States have determined that it would be cost-prohibitive to meet security requirements at all facilities and are considering changing their operations 

into a central issuance system that requires significant process, facility, and staff adjustments. 

To address these concerns, PASS ID modifies the requirement for 

storage of documents used to prove identity. First, the State need 

only keep them for the period for which the driver’s license or identification card is valid, rather than a period of seven to ten years, 

as REAL ID requires. PASS ID would also allow DMVs to store 

such information in either electronic or paper format, as opposed 

REAL ID’s requirement to keep them in both formats. With respect 

to physical security requirements, PASS ID would retain many of 

the requirements of REAL ID to better secure facilities where driver’s licenses and identification cards are stored or issued but makes 

clear that States can choose from a variety of safeguards to achieve 

this goal. 

PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES

The CATO Institute, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the 

Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), as well as NGA and 

NCSL, testified before the OGM subcommittee that the REAL ID 

Act posed serious privacy and civil liberties concerns. 

According to testimony from CDT at the July 15, 2009 hearing, 

the REAL ID Act failed to address privacy concerns surrounding 

secure licensing. CDT contends that the Act and DHS’s final rule 

implementing it created new privacy and security risks while exacerbating old ones.25 The REAL ID Act failed to include statutory 

provisions to protect the privacy of individuals’ personally identifiable information. The American Civil Liberties Union’s testimony 

at the 2007 hearing pointed to four main privacy issues: data on 

the face of the cards, data stored in the machine-readable zone of 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
12 

26Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia Hearing on Understanding the Realities of REAL ID: A Review of Efforts to Secure Driver’s Licenses and Identification Cards (S. Hrg. 110–291), p. 75, March 26, 2007. 27Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia Hearing on Understanding the Realities of REAL ID: A Review of Efforts to Secure Drivers’ Licenses and Identification Cards (S. Hrg. 110–291), p. 81, March 26, 2007. 28 Violence Against Women & Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 

109–162, § 827, 119 Stat. 2960, 3066 (2005). 

the card, data stored in interlinked State Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) databases, and the transmission of data.26 Additionally, privacy advocates feared that REAL ID would lead to a de 

facto national ID card because of the network of interlinked databases and the authority for the Secretary of Homeland Security to 

declare new official purposes for which a compliant card would be 

needed. 

In addition, the REAL ID Act does not contain processes and 

mechanisms to give individuals the ability to access, and amend as 

necessary, information about them stored in Federal or State databases. 

The Department of Homeland Security maintained that because 

it was not explicitly authorized to protect privacy in the REAL ID 

Act, it did not have the legal authority to include such protections 

in the regulations. 

The PASS ID Act contains several important privacy protections 

aimed at mitigating most of the concerns expressed by privacy advocates. The PASS ID Act would require future regulations to include procedures to protect the constitutional rights and civil liberties of those who apply for licenses or identification cards, protect 

individuals’ ability to challenge and correct errors in databases and 

data records, and would prohibit a national, universal design or 

numbering scheme for licenses. In addition, the definition of ‘‘official purpose’’, which designates which federal purposes will require 

a compliant license or identification card, would be limited to the 

purposes defined in statute and so could not be expanded without 

congressional action. 

Information on the face of the card 

The REAL ID Act requires people to list their principal place of 

residence on their driver’s licenses and identification cards. This 

has been a source of substantial concern for victims of domestic violence and others, who fear that making their address so readily 

available could put them in danger.27 The 2006 reauthorization of 

the Violence Against Women Act 28 required that there be exceptions to this REAL ID Act mandate for the principal residence requirement for certain individuals in these categories, and these exceptions were incorporated into the REAL ID regulations. 

The PASS ID Act generally would maintain the requirement to 

include the address of principle residence, but it explicitly incorporates the Violence Against Women Act exemption, and further 

provides that States can except the principle address for an individual whom a State has determined merits the exemption for his 

or her safety. 

The REAL ID Act also requires that temporary driver’s licenses 

or identification cards be conspicuously marked, indicating that 

they are temporary, and non-compliant licenses are required to 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
13 

29 ‘‘Express consent’’ is defined in 18 U.S.C. 2725 to mean ‘‘consent in writing, including consent conveyed electronically that bears an electronic signature as defined in section 106(5) of 

Public Law 106–229.’’ The Committee notes that that definition would apply to this provision 

of law as well. 

clearly state on their face that they may not be accepted by a federal agency for identification or any other official purpose. States 

argue that the requirement in the REAL ID Act regulations to 

label compliant licenses and identification cards as well as noncompliant cards creates a duplicative and unnecessarily costly system that does not contribute to security. 

The PASS ID Act would remove the duplicative requirement that 

a driver’s license or identification card have a separate marking indicating that a license is temporary, and instead denotes temporary 

status with the expiration date. The bill requires that States mark 

compliant documents, instead of non-compliant documents. Removing duplicative information will make the information on licenses 

more useful and easy to read. 

The bill also requires a photograph of the license holder on the 

face of the card. The Committee intends for this photograph to be 

a clear view of the entire face. The Committee recommends that 

DHS use the State Department passport photograph regulations as 

guidance. The State Department regulations are designed to conform to International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) photo 

standards and allow for certain religious exemptions. For example, 

religious headgear is acceptable as long as the face is not obscured. 

Machine-readable zone of the card 

The REAL ID Act requires that driver’s licenses and identification cards include a common, machine-readable component. The 

final implementing regulations for REAL ID specify that compliant 

licenses should contain a two-dimensional barcode standard, which 

is read with the use of an optical scanner. There are currently no 

statutory prohibitions on who may access the data and information 

contained within machine-readable zones of driver’s license and 

identification cards, or how that information may be used. This creates a vulnerability through which third-parties could scan and utilize personal information without the consent of the card holder, 

creating privacy and identity theft concerns. 

PASS ID adds new protections to mitigate privacy and identity 

theft risks associated with the inclusion of machine-readable zones 

on driver’s licenses and identification cards. The PASS ID Act 

would prohibit the inclusion of a social security number on the machine readable zone of a license. In addition, the bill would restrict 

the use of machine-readable information on a driver’s license or 

identification card by third-parties. To clarify the scope of this prohibition, the substitute amendment adopted by the Committee 

clarifies that scanning is permitted when an individual has given 

his or her express consent,29 for law enforcement purposes, for consumer fraud prevention, and for certain financial transactions, such 

as credit checks. The amendment directs the Federal Trade Commission to issue rules for implementing these restrictions, which 

would apply to all driver’s licenses and identification cards. 

The Committee recognizes that there are a number of legitimate 

purposes for which the information contained in the machine readable component of a driver’s license or identification card may be 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
14 

30Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia Hearing on Understanding the Realities of REAL ID: A Review of Efforts to Secure Drivers’ Licenses and Identification Cards (S. Hrg. 110–291), p. 84, March 26, 2007. 31Schwartz Testimony, p. 4. 

scanned and utilized. Such purposes may include, but are not limited to, scanning and providing information to banks for credit 

checks and credit card issuance purposes; scanning and using information for law enforcement purposes; scanning and using information to prevent consumer fraud and identity theft; and scanning 

and sharing the information among federal, State, or local agencies. The Committee does not intend to prohibit any such legitimate uses, and the Chairman stated his intent at the July 29 business meeting to continue to work on this language and amend it 

on the floor to be more permissive. 

PASS ID also strengthens privacy protections more generally by 

requiring procedures to prevent the unauthorized access to, or 

sharing of, information; requiring public notice of privacy policies; 

and establishing a redress process for individuals to correct their 

records. New regulations would require procedures to protect the 

constitutional rights and civil liberties of those who apply for licenses or IDs, and provide individuals with the ability to challenge 

and correct errors in databases and data records. 

Electronic data transmission 

The REAL ID Act calls for DMVs to communicate with several 

Federal databases, all other State databases, and would most likely 

result in States consulting the EVVE database that the National 

Association of Public Health Statistics and Information Systems 

maintains. However, the REAL ID Act does not require protection 

of the electronic communication among these systems and networks, which could leave personally identifiable information open 

to theft or fraud. 

These required databases reside at different agencies, non-governmental entities, and State and local governments. These systems may already provide some protection for transmitting data, 

but in cases where data were not previously shared, there may be 

no protection or encryption. 

The PASS ID Act would require that future regulations include 

procedures to protect any personally identifiable information electronically transmitted in support of complying with the PASS ID 

Act. While groups such as the ACLU 30 and the Center for Democracy and Technology 31 have specifically called for encryption as the 

solution, the PASS ID Act stays technology-neutral in its statutory 

language. This will allow an open rulemaking process to produce 

the best processes to ensure the protection of personally identifiable information. 

Access to air travel and other official purposes 

To date, fifteen States have enacted laws prohibiting compliance 

with REAL ID, and several others have anti-REAL ID legislation 

pending. Unless these States repeal their laws, their residents will 

face restrictions on their movements and actions because they 

won’t have the necessary identification to present when seeking, for 

example, to board a plane or enter a federal building. These restricVerDate Nov 24 2008 02:16 Dec 13, 2009 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR104.XXX SR104

smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
15 

32Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia Hearing on The Impact of Implementation: A Review of the REAL ID Act and the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (S. Hrg. 110–555), p. 53, April 29, 2008. 33Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Hearing on Identification 

Security: Reevaluating the REAL ID Act, July 15, 2009. 34 Baker Testimony, p. 5–6. 

tions will be exacerbated by the fact that many businesses share 

facilities with federal agencies; and according to testimony from the 

Chamber of Commerce at the 2008 hearing, the guidance for identification at such facilities was complicated and confusing.32

To address concerns with the breadth of REAL ID’s official purpose section, while meeting the homeland security objectives, PASS 

ID would require compliant identification for air travel, access to 

nuclear facilities, and Federal facilities that contain mission functions critical to homeland security, national security, or defense, 

such as the Pentagon, fusion centers, or classified laboratories. 

In addition, the PASS ID Act includes language to clarify the 

Secretary of Homeland Security’s unreviewable discretion to determine who may or may not board a commercial aircraft. This does 

not change the Secretary’s current authorities under the REAL ID 

Act, but rather was included to allay concerns expressed that the 

REAL ID Act was unclear on this point. Since its inception, the 

Transportation Security Administration (TSA), an agency under 

the Secretary’s purview, has always had the statutory authority to 

set screening procedures for cargo and people boarding commercial 

aircraft. While the REAL ID Act set standards for what type of 

State issued identification documents TSA can rely upon in its 

screening process, it did not rescind TSA’s authority to rely on 

other types of identification documents or use other methods to ascertain identity. During the July 15, 2009, hearing on the PASS ID 

Act, Secretary Napolitano testified that inclusion of language clarifying TSA’s authority in this regard would not change TSA’s current operating procedure.33

PASS ID, as introduced, provided that ‘‘no person shall be denied 

boarding a commercial aircraft solely on the basis of failure to 

present a driver’s license or identification card issued pursuant to 

this subtitle.’’ At the July 2009 hearing, former DHS Assistant Secretary Stewart Baker testified that the wording of this provision 

may lead to litigation by those denied boarding an aircraft because 

they did not have a compliant license, since the language was ambiguous on what is meant by ‘‘solely.’’ 34 To address this concern, 

Senator Voinovich offered an amendment clarifying the intent to 

codify the TSA’s existing authority. That amendment, adopted by 

the Committee, provides: ‘‘Any person not presenting a driver’s license or identification card issued pursuant to this subtitle may be 

permitted to board a commercial aircraft or denied permission to 

board such aircraft at the unreviewable discretion of the Secretary 

or his or her designated security official.’’ 

III. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

On June 15, 2009, S. 1261 was introduced by Senator Akaka and 

was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Senators Alexander, Baucus, Burris, Carper, Leahy, 

Lieberman, Voinovich, and Tester are cosponsors of the legislation. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
16 

On July 15, 2009, the Committee held a hearing on S. 1261. Witnesses included: Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security; 

Jim Douglas, Governor of Vermont; Stewart A. Baker, former Assistant Secretary for Policy, DHS; Leroy D. Baca, Sheriff, Los Angeles County; David Quam, Director of Federal Relations, NGA; 

and Ari Schwartz, Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Center for Democracy and Technology. 

On July 29, 2009, the Committee ordered S. 1261, as amended 

by the Lieberman-Collins-Voinovich substitute amendment, the 

Tester amendment, and the Voinovich amendment, reported favorably by voice vote. Present for the vote were Chairman Lieberman; 

Senators Akaka, Carper, Pryor, McCaskill, Tester, and Burris; 

Ranking Minority Member Collins; Senator Voinovich. 

The Lieberman-Collins-Voinovich substitute amendment makes a 

number of policy changes as well as technical changes to the bill 

as introduced. 

First, the amendment requires that birth records be verified with 

the issuing agency no later than 6 years after the issuance of final 

regulations, provided that the Secretary of Homeland Security has 

certified that an electronic system enabling such verification is 

functioning and has access to all States’ electronic birth records. It 

also establishes a grant program to help States digitize birth and 

death records and authorizes $150 million for the grants. 

Second, it struck section 242(a)(1)(B), which stated that an individual may not be denied the right to board an airplane solely on 

the basis of not presenting a PASS ID compliant license. 

Third, the amendment modifies Section 4 of S. 1261 to direct the 

Federal Trade Commission to issue rules for the exceptions to the 

prohibition on certain uses of the data on the machine-readable 

component of a driver’s license or identification card. 

Fourth, the amendment authorizes DHS to issue an interim final 

rule implementing PASS ID, instead of repeating the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) process that was already executed for 

the REAL ID Act. 

As discussed in the previous section, the Voinovich amendment 

clarifies the Secretary’s unreviewable discretion to deny or grant an 

individual boarding on a commercial aircraft. 

The Tester amendment adds a provision requiring reporting on 

the privacy impacts of the PASS ID Act. 

IV. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title 

This section establishes the title of the act as the ‘‘Providing for 

Additional Security in States’ Identification Act of 2009’’ or the 

‘‘PASS ID Act.’’ 

Section 2. Repeal 

This section repeals Title II of the REAL ID Act of 2005 (Division 

B of Public Law 109–13). 

Section 3. Identification security 

This section amends Title II of the Homeland Security Act of 

2002 (6 U.S.C. 121 et seq.) by adding a new subtitle E, which imVerDate Nov 24 2008 02:16 Dec 13, 2009 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR104.XXX SR104

smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
17 

proves security for driver’s licenses and personal identification 

cards. 

Section 241 of the new subtitle E would define the terms ‘‘driver’s license,’’ ‘‘identification card,’’ ‘‘materially compliant,’’ ‘‘official 

purpose,’’ ‘‘Secretary,’’ and ‘‘State.’’ 

Subsection 242(a) of the new subtitle E sets the minimum standards for an identification document that is to be used for certain 

official purposes, including boarding commercial aircraft and entering certain secure federal facilities. Beginning one year after the 

interim final rule is issued, a federal agency could not accept, as 

a means of identification for an official purpose, any driver’s license 

or State-issued identification card unless the State is materially 

compliant by certifying to the Secretary that the State has commenced issuing driver’s licenses and identification cards that comply with the requirements of the PASS ID Act. Beginning six years 

after enactment, a federal agency could not accept, as a means of 

identification for an official purpose, any driver’s license or Stateissued identification card that is not compliant. Additionally, this 

section provides that the Secretary of Homeland Security shall prescribe a process to certify whether States are meeting the standards for identification security. This section would clarify that any 

identification document meeting the requirements of subtitle E 

could be certified as compliant with the subtitle. 

Subsection 242(b) of the new subtitle E sets the minimum requirements for the contents of a compliant driver’s license or identification card, including: (1) the person’s legal name; (2) the person’s date of birth; (3) the person’s gender; (4) a driver’s license or 

identification card number; (5) a digital photograph of the person; 

(6) a person’s address, except as excepted by the Violence Against 

Women Act or for those whom a State determines should be excepted for safety reasons; (7) the person’s signature; (8) security 

features to protect the physical integrity of the document; (9) a 

common machine-readable technology; and (10) a unique symbol 

designating that the document is compliant with the requirements 

of this subtitle. 

Subsection 242(c) of the new subtitle E sets the minimum standards for a State to issue a compliant driver’s license or identification card. In order to obtain a compliant document, an individual 

must present a photo identity document, except that a non-photo 

document is acceptable if it includes both the person’s full name 

and date of birth; proof of date of birth; proof of the person’s social 

security number; documentation showing a person’s address of 

principle residence; and evidence that a person is a citizen of, or 

has lawful status in, the United States. This section requires that 

licenses may only be issued temporarily to individuals who are not 

citizens, lawful permanent residents, or certain asylees or refugees. 

Temporary driver’s licenses and identification documents would be 

required to clearly show an expiration date and would be valid only 

for an individual’s authorized period of admission to the United 

States or for one year, if no such date exists. States would be required to use the automated system known as Systematic Alien 

Verification for Entitlements to verify the lawful presence of any 

person other than a United States citizen or national applying for 

compliant identification. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
18 

Subsection 242(d) of the new subtitle E requires States to adopt 

several practices in issuing licenses, including: (1) physical or electronic retention of source documents; (2) a facial image capture to 

create a digital photograph; (3) an effective procedure to confirm or 

verify renewal information; (4) confirmation of social security account numbers; (5) electronic verification of birth records after certification that such electronic systems exist after six years; (6) confirmation that an applicant does not possess or has surrendered 

any other identification compliant with this subtitle; (7) physical 

security of document manufacturing; (8) protecting the personally 

identifiable information of driver’s license and identification card 

holders and access to amend State information as determined appropriate by the State; (9) appropriate background checks of individuals involved in issuance of driver’s licenses and State-issued 

identification cards; (10) fraudulent document recognition training 

for issuing staff; and (11) limiting the validity of any compliant 

driver’s license or identification card to eight years. 

Subsection 242(e) of the new subtitle E requires that the Secretary assess, at least annually, whether an electronic system to 

allow reliable real-time verification of birth records exists, is adequately deployed, and includes necessary security and privacy 

measures. 

Subsection 242(f) of the new subtitle E requires that States adopt 

an exceptions process for documentation presented pursuant to section (c) that applicants may not have due to reasons beyond their 

control, including loss through natural disasters. Alternative documents may not be used to demonstrate lawful presence unless such 

documents establish that the applicant is a citizen or national of 

the United States. 

Subsection 242(g) of the new subtitle E provides that States may 

not be required to pay fees for the use of a federal system or database in connection with fulfilling the requirements to issue a compliant driver’s license or identification card. 

Subsection 242(h) of the new subtitle E clarifies that States are 

not prohibited from issuing driver’s licenses, identification cards, or 

other documents that are not in compliance with the requirements 

of this subtitle, although federal agencies may not accept non-compliant documents for an official purpose. 

Section 243 of the new subtitle E requires that the Secretary of 

Homeland Security keep a record in the appropriate aviation security screening database of any individual convicted of using a false 

driver’s license or State-issued identification card at an airport. 

Subsection 244(a) of the new subtitle E establishes a grant program to assist States in conforming to the minimum standards of 

this subtitle. At least two-thirds of yearly grants made available 

through appropriated funds would be distributed proportionally to 

the States based on the number of driver’s licenses or identification 

cards issued in the prior year. The remaining third would be allocated by the Secretary of Homeland Security at his or her discretion. Each State would be guaranteed at least 0.35 percent of the 

total allocation, except certain U.S. territories would be guaranteed 

at least 0.08 percent of the total allocation. 

Subsection 244(b) of the new subtitle E establishes a grant program to assist States in digitizing birth records, linking birth 

records with death records, and electronically verifying birth 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
19 

records. Such grants would be distributed through the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency in coordination with the Secretary 

of Health and Human Services. 

Section 245 of the new subtitle E codifies a demonstration 

project, which is currently underway with the support of the Department of Homeland Security, to evaluate the feasibility of a 

State or States establishing a system to assist in determining 

whether an applicant already possesses a driver’s license or identification card issued pursuant to the requirements of subsection 

242(d). This section requires that the demonstration project include: a review of the costs of such a system; the security and privacy measures necessary to protect the integrity and physical security of licenses; and a governance structure for managing such a 

system, which would also protect the security and confidentiality of 

personally identifiable information contained in the system. This 

section does not authorize the creation by the federal government 

of a national database of driver’s license information or require 

States to provide all other States with direct access to their motor 

vehicle databases. 

Section 246 of the new subtitle E gives the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation 

and the States, the authority to issue regulations, set standards, 

and issue grants under this subtitle. This section also permits the 

Secretary of Homeland Security to grant a State an extension of 

time to comply with the requirements if the State provides adequate justification. 

Section 247 of the new subtitle E would clarify that nothing in 

this subtitle be construed to affect the authority of States or the 

Secretary of Transportation under chapter 303 of title 49, United 

States Code. That chapter directs the Secretary of Transportation 

to establish a National Drivers’ Registry to track individuals ineligible for a driver’s license. In addition, this section would make 

clear that no State laws that are both consistent with this subtitle 

or rules issued to implement this subtitle and more protective of 

personal privacy than required by this subtitle or by regulations 

issued to implement this subtitle, would be preempted by this subtitle. 

Section 4. Identification security 

This section amends Chapter 123 of title 18, United States Code 

by adding subsection 2272(c), which includes new prohibitions on 

the use of machine readable information stored on driver’s licenses 

or State-issued identification cards. 

The new subsection 2272(c) would allow the scanning or reading 

of information contained in the machine-readable zone of a driver’s 

license or State-issued identification card. Such information would 

be prohibited from being resold, shared, or traded with third parties, used to track the use of a driver’s license or identification 

card, or stored by creating a record. Within two years, the Federal 

Trade Commission must issue regulations to define exceptions to 

those prohibitions through a collection of acceptable uses. At a minimum, such exceptions would include using the information for 

credit checks, for law enforcement purposes, for prevention of consumer fraud, in support of privacy laws, or for a use for which the 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
20 

driver’s license or identification card holder has given their express 

written consent. 

Section 5. Rulemaking 

This section requires DHS to promulgate interim final rules to 

implement the PASS ID Act within nine months of the law’s enactment. 

The interim final regulations, as well as the final regulations, 

must include procedures and requirements to protect the privacy 

rights, constitutional rights, and civil liberties of individuals who 

apply for and hold compliant driver’s licenses or identification 

cards. The regulations would also require procedures to protect any 

electronically transmitted personally identifiable information, both 

inside the federal government and among the States. In addition, 

a process must be established to allow individuals to access, 

amend, and correct their own personally identifiable information 

contained in federal databases used to comply with this Act. Some 

federal systems already have such procedures in place in accordance with the Privacy Act and will not be required to create new 

procedures. The regulations may not require that States use a common numbering or design standard for driver’s licenses and identification cards. The regulations will apply only to driver’s licenses 

and identification cards that are issued in compliance with the 

PASS ID Act and not to non-compliant documents or other identification documents issued by States. 

Section 6. Savings provision 

This section includes a savings of certain administrative actions, 

such as personnel actions, agreements, grants, and contracts, carried out under the REAL ID Act. It also clarifies that laws that 

were amended or repealed by title II of the REAL ID Act of 2005 

would be left unchanged by S. 1261. 

Section 7. Annual privacy report 

This section requires the DHS Chief Privacy Officer and the Civil 

Rights and Civil Liberties Officer to issue an annual report analyzing privacy implications of implementation of this Act to the 

Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee 

and the House Homeland Security Committee. 

V. EVALUATION OF REGULATORY IMPACT

Pursuant to the requirement of paragraph 11(b)(1) of rule XXVI 

of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has considered 

the regulatory impact of this bill. 

VI. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

OCTOBER 15, 2009. 

Hon. JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1261, the Providing for Additional Security in States’ Identification Act of 2009. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
21 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark Grabowicz. 

Sincerely, 

DOUGLAS W. ELMENDORF. 

Enclosure. 

S. 1261—Providing for Additional Security in States’ Identification 

Act of 2009 

Summary: S. 1261 would repeal title II of the REAL ID Act of 

2005 (Division B of Public Law 109–13) and place new requirements on states to improve the security of driver’s licenses and 

identification cards. The legislation would authorize the appropriation of whatever sums are necessary for fiscal years 2010 through 

2015 for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to make 

grants to states to help them comply with the bill’s requirements. 

The bill also would authorize the appropriation of $150 million over 

the 2011–2013 period for DHS to make grants to states to ensure 

the accuracy of birth records. In addition, S. 1261 would direct 

DHS to establish a demonstration project relating to the security 

and integrity of driver’s licenses. 

S. 1261 also would waive the fees that states currently pay to access certain DHS and Social Security Administration (SSA) databases to check the eligibility of applicants for driver’s licenses and 

identification cards. The bill would establish new federal crimes relating to the misuse of data on driver’s licenses and identification 

cards. 

CBO estimates that implementing S. 1261 would increase discretionary costs by $123 million over the 2010–2014 period, assuming 

appropriation of the necessary amounts. We estimate that enacting 

the bill would increase direct spending by $4 million over both the 

2010–2014 and 2010–2019 periods. Enacting S. 1261 would have no 

significant effect on revenues. 

S. 1261 contains intergovernmental mandates as defined in the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) because it would require 

states to have security and privacy policies for personally identifiable information that they collect. Many states currently have similar policies. CBO estimates that the cost of creating or updating 

such policies to comply with the new requirements would be small 

and well below the threshold established in UMRA for intergovernmental mandates ($69 million in 2009, adjusted annually for inflation). 

S. 1261 would impose a private-sector mandate as defined in 

UMRA by prohibiting persons from scanning and storing certain 

information contained on a driver’s license or identification card. 

CBO estimates that the cost of complying with the mandate would 

fall below the annual threshold for private-sector mandates ($139 

million in 2009, adjusted annually for inflation). 

Estimated Cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of S. 1261 is shown in the following table. The costs 

of this legislation fall within budget function 750 (administration 

of justice). 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
22 

By fiscal year in millions of dollars— 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2010– 

2014 

CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

DHS Grants to States for Birth Records 

Authorization Level .............................................................. 0 150 0 0 0 150 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................... 0 6 23 39 30 98 

DHS Demonstration Project 

Estimated Authorization Level ............................................. 25 0 0 0 0 25 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................... 15 5 5 0 0 25 

Total Changes 

Estimated Authorization Level .................................... 25 150 0 0 0 175 

Estimated Outlays ...................................................... 15 11 28 39 30 123 

CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING 

Waiver of DHS Fees: 

Estimated Authorization Level ............................................. 2 2 0 0 0 4 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................... 2 2 0 0 0 4 

Note: DHS = Department of Homeland Security. 

Basis of Estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that S. 1261 

will be enacted near the beginning of fiscal year 2010. We estimate 

that implementing the bill would increase discretionary spending 

by $123 million over the 2010–2014 period, assuming appropriation 

of the necessary amounts. We estimate that enacting the bill would 

increase direct spending by $4 million over both the 2010–2014 and 

2010–2019 periods. Enacting S. 1261 would have no significant effect on revenues. 

Spending subject to appropriation 

DHS Grants for Birth Records. S. 1261 would authorize the appropriation of $150 million over the 2011–2013 period for DHS to 

make grants to states to ensure the accuracy of birth records. CBO 

assumes that $150 million will be appropriated by the beginning of 

fiscal year 2011 and that outlays will follow the historical spending 

patterns for similar activities. 

DHS Demonstration Project. The bill would authorize the appropriation of whatever sums are necessary for fiscal years 2010 

through 2012 for a demonstration project to evaluate an electronic 

system for verifying that applicants for driver’s licenses or identification cards do not already possess such documents. The Congress 

appropriated $50 million in fiscal year 2009 for DHS to begin this 

project. Based on information from DHS, CBO estimates that the 

department would need $25 million in 2010 to complete the demonstration project and that these funds would be spent by the end 

of fiscal year 2012. 

Grants to Assist States in Complying with Bill’s Requirements. 

Title II of the Real ID Act of 2005 (Division B of Public Law 109– 

13, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, 

the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005) placed requirements on states to improve the security of driver’s licenses 

and identification cards by May of 2008. Since enactment, nearly 

half the states have passed laws or resolutions opposing the act, 

and DHS has delayed the deadline. (Currently, states must achieve 

partial compliance with the provisions of the REAL ID Act by December 31, 2009, and full compliance by May of 2011.) CBO has no 

basis for estimating the number of states that will comply with the 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
23 

REAL ID Act, so we cannot compare the compliance costs of S. 

1261 with those under current law. 

The REAL ID Act authorized the appropriation of whatever sums 

are necessary for fiscal years 2005 through 2009 for DHS to make 

grants to states to assist them in complying with the act’s provisions. Over the 2006–2009 period, the Congress appropriated about 

$140 million for this purpose. However, the Administration’s estimate of the total costs to states to comply with the act exceeded 

$1 billion. As noted above, it is possible that many states will not 

comply with the act’s provisions, so federal costs to help states implement the REAL ID Act are uncertain. 

S. 1261 would authorize the appropriation of whatever sums are 

necessary over the 2010–2015 period for DHS to make grants to 

states to help them comply with the bill’s provisions. The legislation would repeal title II of the REAL ID Act of 2005, but the bill 

contains new provisions that would require states to improve the 

security of driver’s licenses and identification cards. Compared to 

current law, S. 1261 would provide more flexibility to states in 

adopting methods to verify identification documents provided by 

driver’s license applicants. 

If all states choose to comply with the provisions of the REAL ID 

Act, CBO expects that the compliance costs of S. 1261 would be 

less expensive than those under current law because of the greater 

flexibility provided by the bill. Because we do not know how many 

states will eventually comply with the REAL ID Act, however, we 

have no basis for estimating the costs or savings of S. 1261 relative 

to current law. 

SSA. Under current law, states reimburse the Social Security Administration (SSA) for state motor-vehicle agencies’ use of the Social Security Online Verification (SSOLV) system. In recent years, 

states have conducted roughly 20 million SSOLV queries annually. 

At an average cost of around 1 cent per transaction, states have 

paid SSA approximately $200,000 to $250,000 per year. S. 1261 

would waive those fees, and CBO estimates that SSA’s fee collections would decrease, thus increasing net spending subject to appropriation by less than $500,000 annually over the 2010–2014 period. 

Direct spending and revenues 

S. 1261 would waive the fees that states currently pay to access 

certain DHS databases to check the eligibility of applicants for 

driver’s licenses and identification cards. CBO estimates that this 

provision would decrease fee collections—and thus increase direct 

spending—by about $2 million annually over the 2010–2011 period. 

DHS Fees. About half of the states use DHS’s Systematic Alien 

Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program for checking the immigration status of applicants for driver’s licenses and identification cards. The department collected about $1 million in fees in 

2009 from those states. In 2010 and subsequent years, however, we 

expect greater collections as more jurisdictions use the SAVE program. Based on information from the department, CBO estimates 

that enacting S. 1261 would decrease fee collections by roughly $2 

million annually over the 2010–2011 period. 

DHS periodically reviews its fees for providing certain services 

and sets fees sufficient to ensure the recovery of the full costs of 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
24 

providing all such services, including the costs of services provided 

without charge to certain applicants. DHS is now completing a fee 

review; CBO assumes that this fee adjustment would be unaffected 

by S. 1261 and that DHS would raise fees as necessary sometime 

in 2011 to offset the additional costs resulting from enactment of 

S. 1261. In that case, the bill would have no significant net effect 

on DHS spending after fiscal year 2011. 

Other Provisions. In addition, S. 1261 could increase collections 

of criminal fines for violations of the bill’s provisions relating to the 

misuse of data on driver’s licenses and identification cards. Criminal fines are recorded as revenues, deposited in the Crime Victims 

Fund, and subsequently spent without further appropriation. CBO 

estimates that any increases in revenues and direct spending 

would not be significant in any year. 

Estimated impact on state, local, and tribal governments: S. 1261 

contains intergovernmental mandates as defined in UMRA. The 

bill would require states to issue public notices about their security 

and privacy policies that include information about how personally 

identifiable information is used, stored, accessed, and shared. The 

bill also would require states to have a process that would allow 

individuals to access, amend, and correct their information. Information from groups representing state governments indicates that 

most states currently have such policies and procedures, though 

some may need to be revised. Therefore, CBO estimates that the 

cost to states of those requirements would be well below the 

threshold established in UMRA for intergovernmental mandates 

($69 million in 2009, adjusted annually for inflation). 

Other provisions of the bill would benefit state, local, and tribal 

governments. The bill would repeal the requirements of the REAL 

ID Act and replace them with more flexible requirements for 

issuing compliant driver’s licenses and identification cards. The bill 

also would authorize appropriations that could be used to pay for 

those requirements, and it would prohibit the federal government 

from charging fees to states to access the SAVE and SSOLV data 

systems. 

Estimated impact on the private sector: S. 1261 would impose a 

private-sector mandate as defined in UMRA by prohibiting persons 

from scanning the information contained in the machine-readable 

component of a driver’s license or identification card and storing, 

reselling, sharing, or trading that information. The bill also would 

prohibit tracking the use of a driver’s license or identification card. 

According to the FTC and industry sources, few private entities 

currently scan driver’s licenses, and for those that do, the costs of 

changing that practice would be minimal. Therefore, CBO expects 

that the cost of complying with the mandate would fall below the 

annual threshold established in UMRA for private-sector mandates 

($139 million in 2009, adjusted annually for inflation). 

Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Mark Grabowicz (DHS) and 

David Rafferty (SSA); Impact on State, local, and Tribal Governments: Melissa Merrell; Impact on the private sector: Marin Randall. 

Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director 

for Budget Analysis. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
25 

VII. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the following changes in existing law made by 

the bill, as reported, are shown as follows: (existing law proposed 

to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed 

in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in 

roman): 

EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT 

FOR DEFENSE, THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR, AND 

TSUNAMI RELIEF, 2005 

(Public Law 109–13) 

* * * * * * * 

DIVISION B—REAL ID ACT OF 2005 

* * * * * * * 

øTITLE II—IMPROVED SECURITY FOR DRIVER’S LICENSES AND PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION CARDS 

SEC. 201. DEFINITIONS. 

In this title, the following definitions apply: 

(1) DRIVER’S LICENSE.—The term ‘‘driver’s license’’ means a 

motor vehicle operator’s license, as defined in section 30301 of 

title 49, United States Code. 

(2) IDENTIFICATION CARD.—The term ‘‘identification card’’ 

means a personal identification card, as defined in section 

1028(d) of title 18, United States Code, issued by a State. 

(3) OFFICIAL PURPOSE.—The term ‘‘official purpose’’ includes 

but is not limited to accessing Federal facilities, boarding federally regulated commercial aircraft, entering nuclear power 

plants, and any other purposes that the Secretary shall determine. 

(4) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary 

of Homeland Security. 

(5) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means a State of the United 

States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, 

the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, and any other territory or possession of the United States. 

SEC. 202. MINIMUM DOCUMENT REQUIREMENTS AND ISSUANCE 

STANDARDS FOR FEDERAL RECOGNITION. 

(a) MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR FEDERAL USE.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Beginning 3 years after the date of the enactment of this division, a Federal agency may not accept, for 

any official purpose, a driver’s license or identification card 

issued by a State to any person unless the State is meeting the 

requirements of this section. 

(2) STATE CERTIFICATIONS.—The Secretary shall determine 

whether a State is meeting the requirements of this section 

based on certifications made by the State to the Secretary. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
26 

Such certifications shall be made at such times and in such 

manner as the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of 

Transportation, may prescribe by regulation. 

(b) MINIMUM DOCUMENT REQUIREMENTS.—To meet the requirements of this section, a State shall include, at a minimum, the following information and features on each driver’s license and identification card issued to a person by the State: 

(1) The person’s full legal name. 

(2) The person’s date of birth. 

(3) The person’s gender. 

(4) The person’s driver’s license or identification card number. 

(5) A digital photograph of the person. 

(6) The person’s address of principle residence. 

(7) The person’s signature. 

(8) Physical security features designed to prevent tampering, 

counterfeiting, or duplication of the document for fraudulent 

purposes. 

(9) A common machine-readable technology, with defined 

minimum data elements. 

(c) MINIMUM ISSUANCE STANDARDS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—To meet the requirements of this section, 

a State shall require, at a minimum, presentation and 

verification of the following information before issuing a driver’s license or identification card to a person: 

(A) A photo identity document, except that a non-photo 

identity document is acceptable if it includes both the person’s full legal name and date of birth. 

(B) Documentation showing the person’s date of birth. 

(C) Proof of the person’s social security account number 

or verification that the person is not eligible for a social security account number. 

(D) Documentation showing the person’s name and address of principle residence. 

(2) SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—To meet the requirements of this section, a State shall comply with the minimum standards of 

this paragraph. 

(B) EVIDENCE OF LAWFUL STATUS.—A State shall require, 

before issuing a driver’s license or identification card to a 

person, valid documentary evidence that the person— 

(i) is a citizen or national of the United States; 

(ii) is an alien lawfully admitted for permanent or 

temporary residence in the United States; 

(iii) has conditional permanent resident status in 

the United States; 

(iv) has an approved application for asylum in the 

United States or has entered into the United States in 

refugee status; 

(v) has a valid, unexpired nonimmigrant visa or 

nonimmigrant visa status for entry into the United 

States; 

(vi) has a pending application for asylum in the 

United States; 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
27 

(vii) has a pending or approved application for temporary protected status in the United States; 

(viii) has approved deferred action status; or 

(ix) has a pending application for adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States or conditional permanent resident status in the United States. 

(C) TEMPORARY DRIVER’S LICENSES AND IDENTIFICATION

CARDS.— 

(i) IN GENERAL.—If a person presents evidence under 

any of clauses (v) through (ix) of subparagraph (B), the 

State may only issue a temporary driver’s license or 

temporary identification card to the person. 

(ii) EXPIRATION DATE.—A temporary driver’s license 

or temporary identification card issued pursuant to 

this subparagraph shall be valid only during the period of time of the applicant’s authorized stay in the 

United States or, if there is no definite end to the period of authorized stay, a period of one year. 

(iii) DISPLAY OF EXPIRATION DATE.—A temporary 

driver’s license or temporary identification card issued 

pursuant to this subparagraph shall clearly indicate 

that it is temporary and shall state the date on which 

it expires. 

(iv) RENEWAL.—A temporary driver’s license or temporary identification card issued pursuant to this subparagraph may be renewed only upon presentation of 

valid documentary evidence that the status by which 

the applicant qualified for the temporary driver’s license or temporary identification card has been extended by the Secretary of Homeland Security. 

(3) VERIFICATION OF DOCUMENTS.—To meet the requirements 

of this section, a State shall implement the following procedures: 

(A) Before issuing a driver’s license or identification card 

to a person, the State shall verify, with the issuing agency, 

the issuance, validity, and completeness of each document 

required to be presented by the person under paragraph 

(1) or (2). 

(B) The State shall not accept any foreign document, 

other than an official passport, to satisfy a requirement of 

paragraph (1) or (2). 

(C) Not later than September 11, 2005, the State shall 

enter into a memorandum of understanding with the Secretary of Homeland Security to routinely utilize the automated system known as Systematic Alien Verification for 

Entitlements, as provided for by section 404 of the Illegal 

Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 

1996 (110 Stat. 3009–664), to verify the legal presence status of a person, other than a United States citizen, applying for a driver’s license or identification card. 

(d) OTHER REQUIREMENTS.—To meet the requirements of this 

section, a State shall adopt the following practices in the issuance 

of driver’s licenses and identification cards: 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
28 

(1) Employ technology to capture digital images of identity 

source documents so that the images can be retained in electronic storage in a transferable format. 

(2) Retain paper copies of source documents for a minimum 

of 7 years or images of source documents presented for a minimum of 10 years. 

(3) Subject each person applying for a driver’s license or 

identification card to mandatory facial image capture. 

(4) Establish an effective procedure to confirm or verify a renewing applicant’s information. 

(5) Confirm with the Social Security Administration a social 

security account number presented by a person using the full 

social security account number. In the event that a social security account number is already registered to or associated with 

another person to which any State has issued a driver’s license 

or identification card, the State shall resolve the discrepancy 

and take appropriate action. 

(6) Refuse to issue a driver’s license or identification card to 

a person holding a driver’s license issued by another State 

without confirmation that the person is terminating or has terminated the driver’s license. 

(7) Ensure the physical security of locations where driver’s licenses and identification cards are produced and the security 

of document materials and papers from which driver’s licenses 

and identification cards are produced. 

(8) Subject all persons authorized to manufacture or produce 

driver’s licenses and identification cards to appropriate security clearance requirements. 

(9) Establish fraudulent document recognition training programs for appropriate employees engaged in the issuance of 

driver’s licenses and identification cards. 

(10) Limit the period of validity of all driver’s licenses and 

identification cards that are not temporary to a period that 

does not exceed 8 years. 

(11) In any case in which the State issues a driver’s license 

or identification card that does not satisfy the requirements of 

this section, ensure that such license or identification card— 

(A) clearly states on its face that it may not be accepted 

by any Federal agency for federal identification or any 

other official purpose; and 

(B) uses a unique design or color indicator to alert Federal agency and other law enforcement personnel that it 

may not be accepted for any such purpose. 

(12) Provide electronic access to all other States to information contained in the motor vehicle database of the State. 

(13) Maintain a State motor vehicle database that contains, 

at a minimum— 

(A) all data fields printed on driver’s licenses and identification cards issued by the State; and 

(B) motor vehicle driver’s histories, including motor vehicle violations, suspensions, and points on licenses. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
29 

SEC. 203. TRAFFICKING IN AUTHENTICATION FEATURES FOR USE IN 

FALSE IDENTIFICATION DOCUMENTS. 

(a) CRIMINAL PENALTY.—Section 1028(a)(8) of title 18, United 

States Code, is amended by striking ‘‘false authentication features’’ 

and inserting ‘‘false or actual authentication features’’. 

(b) USE OF FALSE DRIVER’S LICENSE AT AIRPORTS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall enter, into the appropriate aviation security screening database, appropriate information regarding any person convicted of using a false driver’s 

license at an airport (as such term is defined in section 40102 

of title 49, United States Code). 

(2) FALSE DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term ‘‘false’’ has 

the same meaning such term has under section 1028(d) of title 

18, United States Code. 

SEC. 204. GRANTS TO STATES. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may make grants to a State to 

assist the State in conforming to the minimum standards set forth 

in this title. 

(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated to the Secretary for each of the fiscal years 2005 

through 2009 such sums as may be necessary to carry out this title. 

SEC. 205. AUTHORITY. 

(a) PARTICIPATION OF SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION AND

STATES.—All authority to issue regulations, set standards, and 

issue grants under this title shall be carried out by the Secretary, 

in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation and the 

States. 

(b) EXTENSIONS OF DEADLINES.—The Secretary may grant to a 

State an extension of time to meet the requirements of section 

202(a)(1) if the State provides adequate justification for noncompliance. 

SEC. 206. REPEAL. 

Section 7212 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Public Law 108–458) is repealed. 

SEC. 207. LIMITATION ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION. 

Nothing in this title shall be construed to affect the authorities 

or responsibilities of the Secretary of Transportation or the States 

under chapter 303 of title 49, United States Code.¿ 

* * * * * * * 

UNITED STATES CODE 

TITLE 6. DOMESTIC SECURITY 

* * * * * * * 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

* * * * * * * 

SUBTITLE E—IMPROVED SECURITY FOR DRIVER’S LICENSES AND PERSONAL

IDENTIFICATION CARDS

SEC. 241. DEFINITIONS. 

Sec. 242. Minimum document requirements and issuance standards for Federal 

recognition. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
30 

Sec. 243. Use of false driver’s license at airports. 

Sec. 244. Grants to States. 

Sec. 245. State-to-State one driver, one license demonstration project. 

Sec. 246. Authority. 

Sec. 247. Limitation on statutory construction. 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 1. HOMELAND SECURITY ORGANIZATION 

SUBCHAPTER IV. DIRECTORATE OF BORDER AND 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY 

* * * * * * * 

Subtitle E—Improved Security for Driver’s Licenses and 

Personal Identification Cards 

SEC. 241. DEFINITIONS. 

In this subtitle: 

(1) DRIVER’S LICENSE.—The term ‘driver’s license’ means a 

motor vehicle operator’s license, as defined in section 30301 of 

title 49, United States Code. 

(2) IDENTIFICATION CARD.—The term ‘identification card’ 

means a personal identification card, as defined in section 

1028(d) of title 18, United States Code, issued by a State. 

(3) MATERIALLY COMPLIANT.—A State is ‘materially compliant’ if the State has certified to the Secretary that the State has 

commenced issuing driver’s licenses and identification cards 

that are compliant with the requirements of this subtitle. 

(4) OFFICIAL PURPOSE.—The term ‘official purpose’ means— 

(A) accessing Federal facilities that contain mission 

functions critical to homeland security, national security, or defense; 

(B) accessing nuclear power plants; or 

(C) boarding federally regulated commercial aircraft. 

(5) SECRETARY.—The term ‘Secretary’ means the Secretary of 

Homeland Security. 

(6) STATE.—The term ‘State’ means a State of the United 

States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands. 

SEC. 242. MINIMUM DOCUMENT REQUIREMENTS AND ISSUANCE 

STANDARDS FOR FEDERAL RECOGNITION. 

(a) MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR FEDERAL USE.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Beginning 1 year after the date on which 

final regulations are issued to implement this subtitle, pursuant 

to section 5 of the PASS ID Act— 

(A) a Federal agency may not accept, for any official 

purpose, a driver’s license or identification card issued 

by a State to any person unless the State is materially 

compliant; and 

(B) no person shall be denied boarding a commercial 

aircraft solely on the basis of failure to present a driver’s license or identification card issued pursuant to 

this subtitle. 

(2) AGENCY ACCEPTANCE.—Beginning 6 years after the date 

on which final regulations are issued to implement this subtitle, 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
31 

pursuant to section 5 of the PASS ID Act, a Federal agency may 

not accept, for any official purpose, a driver’s license or identification card unless the license or card complies with subsection 

(b). 

(3) STATE CERTIFICATIONS.—The Secretary shall determine 

whether a State is meeting the requirements of this section 

based on certifications made by the State to the Secretary. Such 

certifications shall be made at such times and in such manner 

as the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, may prescribe by regulation. 

(4) CERTIFICATION OF OTHER IDENTIFICATION DOCUMENTS.— The Secretary may certify any driver’s license or identification 

card, including an Enhanced Driver’s License designated by the 

Secretary under section 7209 of the 9/11 Commission Implementation Act of 2004, as compliant with the requirements of 

this subtitle if the Secretary, after review, determines such license or card meets the requirements of this subtitle. 

(b) MINIMUM DOCUMENT REQUIREMENTS.—To meet the requirements of this section, a State shall include, at a minimum, the following information and features on each driver’s license and identification card issued to a person by the State: 

(1) The person’s legal name. 

(2) The person’s date of birth. 

(3) The person’s gender. 

(4) The person’s driver’s license or identification card number. 

(5) A digital photograph of the person. 

(6) The person’s address of principle residence, except— 

(A) as provided for under section 827 of the Violence 

Against Women Act (Public Law 109–162); or 

(B) for any individual who a State determines should be 

exempted from the requirement under this paragraph to 

protect the safety or security of the applicant. 

(7) The person’s signature. 

(8) A combination of security features designed to protect the 

physical integrity of the document, including the prevention of 

tampering, counterfeiting, or duplication of the document for 

fraudulent purposes. 

(9) A common machine-readable technology, containing the 

data elements available on the face of a driver’s license or identification card. A person’s social security number may not be included in these data elements. 

(10) A unique symbol designated by the Secretary to indicate 

compliance with the requirements under this section. 

(c) MINIMUM ISSUANCE STANDARDS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—To meet the requirements of this section, for 

all driver’s licenses and identification cards issued under this 

subtitle at least 1 year after the date on which final regulations 

are issued to implement this subtitle, pursuant to section 5 of 

the PASS ID Act, a State shall require, at a minimum, presentation and validation of the following information before 

issuing a driver’s license or identification card to a person: 

(A) A photo identity document, except that a non-photo 

identity document is acceptable if it includes both the person’s full name and date of birth. 

(B) Documentation showing the person’s date of birth. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
32 

(C) Proof of the person’s social security account number 

or verification that the person is not eligible for a social security account number. 

(D) Documentation showing the person’s name and address of principle residence. 

(2) SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS.— (A) IN GENERAL.—To meet the requirements of this section, a State shall comply with the minimum standards of 

this paragraph. 

(B) EVIDENCE OF LAWFUL STATUS.—Before issuing a driver’s license or identification card to a person, a State shall 

verify that the person— 

(i) is a citizen or national of the United States; 

(ii) has been granted lawful permanent residence in 

the United States; 

(iii) has been granted asylum or withholding of removal, or has been admitted into the United States as 

a refugee; 

(iv) has been granted temporary residence in the 

United States; 

(v) has been paroled into the United States under 

section 212(d)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality 

Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5)), subject to such exceptions as 

the Secretary, in the Secretary’s unreviewable discretion, may prescribe for aliens paroled into the United 

States for prosecution or other categories of paroled 

aliens; 

(vi) is a lawful nonimmigrant in the United States; 

(vii) has a pending application for asylum or withholding of removal and has been granted employment 

authorization; 

(viii) has been granted temporary protected status in 

the United States or has a pending application for temporary protective status and has been granted employment authorization; 

(ix) has been granted deferred action status; 

(x) has a pending application for adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent 

residence in the United States or conditional permanent resident status in the United States; 

(xi) has otherwise been granted employment autsent 

in the United States, as determined by the 

Secretaryhorization in the United States; or 

(xii) is otherwise an alien lawfully pre in the Secretary’s unreviewable discretion. 

(C) TEMPORARY DRIVER’S LICENSES AND IDENTIFICATION

CARDS.— 

(i) IN GENERAL.—If a person presents evidence under 

any of clauses (iv) through (xii) of subparagraph (B), 

the State may only issue a temporary driver’s license or 

temporary identification card to the person that is 

valid for a time period ending not later than the expiration date of the applicant’s authorized stay in the 

United States or, if there is no such expiration date, for 

a period not to exceed 1 year. The Secretary may, in the 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
33 

Secretary’s unreviewable discretion, authorize the 

issuance of temporary driver’s licenses or temporary 

identification cards, for periods longer than 1 year, to 

employees of international organizations and to other 

nonimmigrant aliens who are authorized to remain in 

the United States for an indefinite period. 

(ii) DISPLAY OF EXPIRATION DATE.—A temporary 

driver’s license or temporary identification card issued 

pursuant to this subparagraph shall clearly state the 

date on which it expires. 

(iii) RENEWAL.—A temporary driver’s license or temporary identification card issued pursuant to this subparagraph may be renewed only upon verification of 

the applicant’s current lawful status. 

(3) VALIDATION OF DOCUMENTS.—To meet the requirements of 

this section, a State— 

(A) shall not accept any foreign document, other than an 

official passport, to satisfy a requirement of paragraph (1) 

or (2); and 

(B) not later than 1 year after the date on which final 

regulations are issued to implement this subtitle, pursuant 

to section 5 of the PASS ID Act, shall enter into a memorandum of understanding with the Secretary to routinely 

utilize the automated system known as Systematic Alien 

Verification for Entitlements established under section 121 

of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (Public 

Law 99–603), to verify the legal presence status of a person, 

other than a United States citizen or national, who is applying for a driver’s license or identification card. 

(d) OTHER REQUIREMENTS.—To meet the requirements of this section, a State shall adopt the following practices in the issuance of 

driver’s licenses and identification cards: 

(1)(A) Employ technology to capture digital images of identity 

source documents so that the images can be retained in electronic storage in a transferrable format for at least as long as 

the applicable driver’s license or identification card is valid; or 

(B) retain paper copies of source documents for at least as 

long as the applicable driver’s license or identification card is 

valid. 

(2) Subject each person who submits an application for a 

driver’s license or identification card to mandatory facial image 

capture. 

(3) Establish an effective procedure to confirm or verify a renewing applicant’s information. 

(4) Confirm with the Social Security Administration a social 

security account number presented by a person using the full 

social security account number. In the event that a social security account number is already registered to or associated with 

another person to which any State has issued a driver’s license 

or identification card, the State may use any appropriate procedures to resolve nonmatches. 

(5) Establish an effective procedure to confirm that a person 

submitting an application for a driver’s license or identification 

card is terminating or has terminated any driver’s license or 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
34 

identification card issued pursuant to this section to such person by a State. 

(6) Provide for the physical security of locations where driver’s licenses and identification cards are produced and the security of document materials and papers from which driver’s licenses and identification cards are produced. 

(7) Establish appropriate administrative and physical safeguards to protect the security, confidentiality, and integrity of 

personally identifiable information collected and maintained at 

locations at which driver’s licenses or identification documents 

are produced or stored, including— 

(A) procedures to prevent the unauthorized access to, or 

use of, personally identifiable information; 

(B) public notice of security and privacy policies, including the use, storage, access to, and sharing of personally 

identifiable information; 

(C) the establishment of a process through which individuals may access, amend, and correct, as determined appropriate by the State, their own personally identifiable information. 

(8) Subject all persons authorized to manufacture or produce 

driver’s licenses and identification cards to appropriate security 

clearance requirements. 

(9) Establish fraudulent document recognition and document 

validation training programs for appropriate employees engaged in the issuance of driver’s licenses and identification 

cards. 

(10) Limit the period of validity of all driver’s licenses and 

identification cards that are not temporary to a period that does 

not exceed 8 years. 

(e) EXCEPTIONS PROCESS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—States shall establish an exceptions process 

to reasonably accommodate persons who, for extraordinary reasons beyond their control, are unable to present the necessary 

documents listed in subsection (c)(1). 

(2) ALTERNATIVE DOCUMENTS.—Alternative documents accepted under an exceptions process established pursuant to paragraph (1) may not be used to demonstrate lawful presence 

under subsection (c)(2) unless such documents establish that the 

person is a citizen or national of the United States. 

(3) REPORT.—States shall include a report on the use of exceptions made under this subsection, which shall not include 

any personally identifiable information, as a component of the 

certification required under subsection (a)(3). 

(f) USE OF FEDERAL SYSTEMS.—States shall not be required to 

pay fees or other costs associated with the use of the automated systems known as Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements and 

Social Security On-Line Verification, or any other Federal electronic 

system, in connection with the issuance of driver’s licenses or identification cards, in accordance with this subtitle. 

(g) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall be 

construed to prohibit a State from issuing driver’s licenses and 

identification cards that do not comply with the requirements of this 

section. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
35 

SEC. 243. USE OF FALSE DRIVER’S LICENSE AT AIRPORTS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall enter, into the appropriate 

aviation security screening database, appropriate information regarding any person convicted of using a false driver’s license at an 

airport. 

(b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

(1) AIRPORT.—The term ‘airport’ has the meaning given such 

term under section 40102 of title 49, United States Code. 

(2) FALSE.—The term ‘false’ has the meaning given such term 

under section 1028(d) of title 18, United States Code. 

SEC. 244. GRANTS TO STATES. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.— (1) IN GENERAL.—There is established a State Driver’s License Enhancement Grant Program to award grants to assist 

States in conforming to the minimum standards set forth in 

this subtitle. 

(2) DISTRIBUTION OF GRANTS.—The Secretary, through the 

Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, 

shall distribute grants awarded under this section to States 

that submit an application as follows: 

(A) PROPORTIONAL ALLOCATION.—Not less than 2⁄3 of the 

amounts appropriated for grants under this section shall be 

allocated to each State in the ratio that— 

(i) the number of driver’s licenses and identification 

cards issued by such State in the most recently ended 

calendar year; bears to 

(ii) the number of driver’s licenses and identifications 

cards issued by all States in the most recently ended 

calendar year. 

(B) REMAINING ALLOCATION.—The Secretary may allocate 

to States any amounts appropriated for grants under this 

section that are not allocated under subparagraph (A) in 

such manner as, in the Secretary’s discretion, will most effectively assist in achieving the goals of this subtitle. 

(C) MINIMUM ALLOCATION.—In allocating funds under 

this section, the Secretary shall ensure that for each fiscal 

year— 

(i) except as provided under clause (ii), each State receives not less than an amount equal to 0.35 percent of 

the total funds appropriated for grants under this section for that fiscal year; and 

(ii) American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and the Virgin Islands each receive not less than an amount equal to 

0.08 percent of the total funds appropriated for grants 

under this section for that fiscal year. 

(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated to the Secretary, for each of the fiscal years 2010 

through 2015, such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section. 

SEC. 245. STATE-TO-STATE ONE DRIVER, ONE LICENSE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall establish a State-to-State 1 driver, 1 

license demonstration project. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
36 

(b) PURPOSE.—The demonstration project established under this 

section shall include an evaluation of the feasibility of establishing 

an electronic system to verify that an applicant for a driver’s license 

or identification card issued in accordance with this subtitle does 

not retain a driver’s license or identification card issued in accordance with this subtitle by another State. 

(c) REQUIREMENTS.—The demonstration project shall include a 

review of— 

(1) the costs affiliated with establishing and maintaining an 

electronic records system; 

(2) the security and privacy measures necessary to protect the 

integrity and physical security of driver’s licenses; and 

(3) the appropriate governance structure to ensure effective 

management of the electronic records system, including preventing the unauthorized use of information in the system, and 

ensuring the security and confidentiality of personally identifiable information. 

(d) SAVINGS PROVISION.—Nothing in this section may be construed to— 

(1) authorize the creation of a national database of driver’s 

license information; or 

(2) authorize States direct access to the motor vehicle database of another State. 

(e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated to the Secretary for each of the fiscal years 2010 

through 2012 such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section. 

SEC. 246. AUTHORITY. 

(a) PARTICIPATION OF SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION AND

STATES.—All authority to issue regulations, set standards, and 

issue grants under this subtitle shall be carried out by the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation and the 

States. 

(b) EXTENSIONS OF DEADLINES.—The Secretary may grant to a 

State an extension of time to meet the requirements of section 

242(a)(1) if the State provides adequate justification for noncompliance. 

SEC. 247. LIMITATION ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION. 

‘‘Nothing in this subtitle may be construed to— 

(1) affect the authorities or responsibilities of the Secretary of 

Transportation or the States under chapter 303 of title 49, 

United States Code; or 

(2) preempt State privacy laws that are more protective of 

personal privacy than the requirements of this subtitle or the 

standards or regulations promulgated to implement this subtitle, provided that such State laws are consistent with this subtitle and the regulations prescribed pursuant to this subtitle. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE 18. DOMESTIC SECURITY 

* * * * * * * 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
37 

CHAPTER 123—PROHIBITION ON RELEASE AND USE OF 

CERTAIN PERSONAL INFORMATION FROM STATE 

MOTOR VEHICLE RECORDS 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 2722. ADDITIONAL UNLAWFUL ACTS. 

(c) COPYING INFORMATION FROM DRIVER’S LICENSES OR IDENTI- FICATION CARDS.—It shall be unlawful for any person, knowingly 

and without lawful authority— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), and 

unless authorized by Federal, State, or local law, beginning 6 

months after the date on which final regulations are issued 

under paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for any person, knowingly and without lawful authority— 

(A) to scan the information contained in the machine 

readable component of a driver’s license or identification 

card; and 

(B)(i) to resell, share or trade that information with any 

other third parties; 

(ii) track the use of a driver’s license or identification 

card; or 

(iii) store the information collected. 

(2) EXCEPTIONS.— (A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years after the date of 

the enactment of the PASS ID Act, the Federal Trade Commission, after providing notice and an opportunity for public comment, shall issue final regulations that provide exceptions to the prohibition under paragraph (1) for acceptable uses of information derived from the machine readable 

component of a driver’s license or identification card for 

purposes including preventing fraud, abuse, or criminal activity. 

(B) ACCEPTABLE USES.—Acceptable uses under subparagraph (A) shall protect the privacy and security of the driver’s license or identification card holder and shall include— 

(i) scanning and sharing personal information for 

credit checks; 

(ii) scanning and sharing, tracking, or storing personal information for law enforcement purposes; 

(iii) scanning and storing information to prevent consumer fraud; 

(iv) scanning and sharing the information between 

Federal, State, and local agencies, in accordance with 

section 552a of title 5, United States Code, and other 

laws relevant to the protection of the privacy of the individual; and 

(v) scanning and using the information for a purpose 

for which the driver’s license or identification card 

holder has given express written consent.’’; 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 2724. CIVIL ACTIONS. 

(a) CAUSE OF ACTION.—A person who knowingly obtains, discloses or uses personal information, from a motor vehicle record, 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
38 

driver’s license, or identification card for a purpose not permitted 

under this chapter shall be liable to the individual to whom the information pertains, who may bring a civil action in a United States 

district court. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 2725. DEFINITIONS. 

In this chapter— 

ø(1)¿ (5) ‘‘motor vehicle record’’ means any record that pertains to a motor vehicle operator’s permit, motor vehicle title, 

motor vehicle registration, or identification card issued by a department of motor vehicles; 

ø(2)¿ (6) ‘‘person’’ means an individual, organization or entity, but does not include a State or agency thereof; and 

ø(3)¿ (7) ‘‘personal information’’ means information that 

identifies an individual, including an individual’s photograph, 

social security number, driver identification number, name, address (but not the 5-digit zip code), telephone number, and 

medical or disability information, but does not include information on vehicular accidents, driving violations, and driver’s status. 

ø(4)¿ (3) ‘‘highly restricted personal information’’ means an 

individual’s photograph or image, social security number, medical or disability information; øand¿ 

(4) ‘‘identification card’’ means a personal identification card, 

as defined in section 1028(d) of title 18, United States Code, 

issued by a State. 

ø(5)¿ (1) ‘‘driver’s license’’ means a motor vehicle operator’s license, as defined in section 30301 of title 49, United States 

Code;’’ 

(2) ‘‘express consent’’ means consent in writing, including 

consent conveyed electronically that bears an electronic signature as defined in section 106(5) of Public Law 106–229. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS