William Holden
Chief, Driver Register
Docket Management
Room PL-401
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Nassif Building
400 Seventh Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20590

October 5, 1998

Dear Mr. Holden:

Following our discussions with you and participation in the hearing held by the House Subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources and Regulatory Affairs, NCSL reiterates that the proposed rule preempts state authority, federalizes the issuance of driver's licenses within states, imposes an unfunded mandate on states in violation of the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act (UMRA), and compromises personal privacy and private information. As currently drafted, the proposed rule goes beyond Congressional intent by requiring states to place Social Security Numbers on state driver's licenses and to verify the validity of this information with the Social Security Administration.

NCSL strongly objects to the rule as proposed and urges NHTSA to delay implementation of the rule until such time as Congress can clarify its intent or repeal Section 656(b) of the Immigration Reform Act.

NHTSA has severely underestimated the cost of implementing the proposed rule. As proposed, the rule will impose a costly unfunded mandate upon the states that violates UMRA. Although the proposed rule provides $325,000 in grants to defray state administrative costs, this amount is insufficient to implement the requirements of the rule. Individual states estimate that the cost of the proposed rule will exceed this amount in the first year. In comments to NHTSA and in conversations with NCSL, states report that the estimate contained in the Preliminary Regulatory Estimate (PRE) inaccurately captures the cost of implementing the proposed rule. States believe that the cost of the proposal will exceed $100 million and thereby violate UMRA.

State estimates of the costs to implement the proposed rule far exceed those costs determined by NHTSA. Virginia estimates that the cost to implement the proposed rule will exceed one million dollars. Minnesota estimates that for fiscal years 2001-2004, implementation costs will exceed $ 5.65 million dollars. In addition, legislative fiscal staff in Washington estimate that implementation would cost over three million dollars in the first year alone.

The proposed regulation requires that states verify, "the validity of each applicant's social security number with the Social Security Administration (SSA), whether or not the social security number is to be included on the driver's license or identification document." NCSL asserts that this interpretation exceeds the Congressional intent relative to the scope of verification (see discussion below). Nonetheless, the cost of verification, both in dollars and in time to state personnel and citizens, is extremely prohibitive. Many states, in their comments to NHTSA, have raised concerns that anticipated high error rates would accentuate this problem. Concerns have also been raised that common errors, such as a simple mismatch between a middle initial and a middle name on the social security card and the current driver's license, would exacerbate the costs of verification.

As previously stated, we believe that it is the responsibility of the federal government to curb illegal immigration; however, the financial responsibility for these efforts should also remain with the federal government. States should not be expected to take on the task of immigration control or be subject to costs associated with this function.

In addition, state legislators are concerned that, contrary to the language in UMRA, no state legislators, other elected officials or their national organizations were consulted to "provide timely and meaningful input" in the development of this regulatory proposal.

NCSL has raised legitimate concerns with the cost estimates contained in the PRE. In particular, we question the origin and accuracy of the "Iowa estimator" for new applicants and remain convinced that it is dramatically below the national average. Annually, approximately five percent of the driving public replaces lost, stolen or damaged driver's licenses. This number alone exceeds the Iowa estimator of 4.7 percent. Once new drivers and drivers migrating between states are included in the calculation, the national percentage of applicants clearly exceeds 4.7 percent. The Iowa estimator provides the foundation for the NHTSA estimate, thereby compromising the entire study.

NHTSA maintains that states have an option to place the SSN on the driver's license (in readable or electronic form) or verify an applicant's SSN with the Social Security Administration (SSA), consistent with Congressional intent. However, contrary to NHTSA assurances that states have this option, NCSL remains convinced that the proposed rule requires states to place the SSN on the driver's license and verify this information with the SSA. The preamble to the proposed rule states that:

The only exception to this requirement is in the case of individuals that do not have a social security number, such as nonimmigrant aliens. Members of Congress and the Congressional Budget Office, who prepared the original congressional estimates of the costs to states, support NCSL's assessment that the proposed rule nullifies the option for states to include SSNs on the face of driver's licenses in direct conflict with Congressional intent.

Even if NHTSA's interpretation is correct and states truly have an option to place the SSN on the driver's license, this "option" is compromised by the fact that states that choose not to have the SSN appear on the license will not be able to have their license used as an official form of federal identification.

Technological advances make it increasingly difficult for individuals to protect personal and private information from criminals. In response to citizen's concerns for privacy and safety, state legislators have moved away from requiring social security numbers on state-issued driver's licenses. At the time of enactment of the law, 38 states either required placement of SSNs on driver's licenses or gave citizens the option to have this information appear. Presently, only six states, Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia require SSNs on driver's licenses. Twenty-one states provide the option to remove the SSN on the driver's license. Currently, the majority of states (22) either do not require or specifically prohibit the use of SSNs on driver's licenses.

Sincerely,

Carl D. Tubbesing
Deputy Executive Director
National Conference of State Legislatures